E122: Is AI the next great computing platform? ChatGPT vs. Google, containing AGI & RESTRICT Act
发布时间 2023-03-31 09:21:51 来源
Oh, Jake has here. Hello, Jake. Hey, Harry. Thanks for showing up. I've been here the whole time. I was just having some of these beautiful salted roasted sessions. And we promised when I went to the store, I kid you not. There was a shelf of these. All flavors available except one flavor. Salt and vinegar. See, salt and vinegar. Entire. We move the market. We move the market.
哦，杰克在这里。你好，杰克。嘿，哈利。谢谢你来了。我一直在这里。我只是在吃这些美丽的盐烤芝士。而且，当我去商店的时候，我们承诺过。有一排这些货架。所有口味都有，除了一个口味。盐和醋味。看，盐和醋味。全年售罄。我们影响了市场。我们影响了市场。
I am not kidding. I go to the fancy, you know, bespoke. The railings went to the railings and trucky. I went to the railings and trucky. They are seasonal. And they have, you know, all these overpriced. First of all, it's called artisanal. That's what I said. The art stuff. The artistic food. The artisanal row where they had this.
我不是在开玩笑。我去了一个很豪华的地方，你知道的，那种定制的。那里有铁栏杆和卡车。我去了铁栏杆和卡车。他们的东西是季节性的。还有很多很贵的，你知道的。首先，这被叫做艺术手工制品。我就是这么说的。那些艺术性的食品就在艺术手工制品区，他们有这些东西。
I kid you not. Spicy. Salty. No salt. Every shelf packed. Then there's one shelf. I can see straight through to the ice cream. But not see salt and vinegar. And I look at the tiny little sign. Salt and vinegar. Sheldon nuts. See salt and vinegar. See salt and vinegar. Sheldon nuts. Sold out across the country.
我不是骗你。这东西又辣又咸。没放盐的也有。每个架子都塞得满满的。但有一个架子，我可以透过看到冰淇淋，但看不到盐和醋味的，于是我看了看那小小的标签，上面写着“盐和醋味夏威夷果”，我看到了盐和醋味夏威夷果，看到了盐和醋味夏威夷果，已经在全国卖光了。
You know, I cannot recommend these more highly. They're incredible. They're delicious. They're delicious. They are delicious. My salty nuts are delicious.
你知道吗，我非常推荐这个。它们真的很棒。它们很好吃。它们真的很美味。我的咸味坚果非常美味。
I love it. Did you see Joe Manchin's high heater op-ed in the Wall Street Journal? Oh, oh my god. Yep. Joe Manchin went for it. Would Joe Manchin's running for president?
我太喜欢了。你有看到乔·曼钦在《华尔街日报》发表的高调文章吗？哦，我的天啊。对啊。乔·曼钦真的很努力。乔·曼钦会竞选总统吗？
He is. I think, okay. So let me have sex right there. Just Joe Manchin, Nikki Haley, and who's the guy from Florida? That's your question. By the way, there was a big defection that was leaked this week. Ron Latter flipped from Trump to Tessantis. That's a big one because Latter is good for a lot of money, five to ten million at least.
他是...我认为，好的。所以让我在那里进行性行为。只有乔·曼钦、尼基·哈雷还有那个来自佛罗里达州的家伙？这是你的问题。顺便说一下，本周有一个大缺陷被泄露了。罗恩·拉特从特朗普转向了特桑蒂斯。这是个大事件，因为拉特至少能拿到五到十百万美元。
Joe Manchin, what impact would he have coming to the race? I'm not throwing him. Look for your honest opinion. Well, it depends how he comes in. What did he say in the op-ed?
如果Joe Manchin参加竞选，会对结果产生什么影响？我并不想就此做出结论。想听听你的诚实看法。这得看他怎么参选。他在专栏文章中表达了什么观点？
He was talking about the insincereity of the Biden administration to control costs and how everybody was incompetent. And it's certainly there are some waste and we can control some spending and everybody needs to grow up and get in a room and just manage the budget for the American people and stop playing politics.
他在谈论拜登政府控制开支的虚伪，以及每个人都无能的问题。当然有些浪费我们可以控制一些支出，每个人都需要成熟起来，走进一个房间，为美国人民管理预算，停止玩政治游戏。
Yeah. I think the headline of the article actually to your point, Jika, was much worse than the substance of the article. Sax, but if you see the headline, I don't know, Nick, if you can just throw it up there, it was brutal. The headline and the byline of the article, I think, was more damaging than the substance of the article.
是的，我认为这篇文章的标题实际上支持了你的观点，Jika，但如果你看到了标题，我不知道，Nick，如果你能将它放在那里，那就太残酷了。我认为这篇文章的标题和署名比文章的内容更具破坏力。
Biden's inflation reduction acts betrayal. Instead of implementing the law as intended, his administration subverts it for ideological, ideological ends. I have to think that Joe was responsible for that, for the titling of that article. You know, he would get permission to approve it. Right. In the byline of this.
拜登的通货膨胀减少行动是背叛，他的行政部门没有按原意执行这项法律，而是为了意识形态目的而颠覆了它。我认为乔·拜登对此有责任，因为他会获得批准。对，就是在这篇文章的署名中。
And by the way, I think if you guys remember, we talked about this when that act was first published. And if you guys remember, I think I pulled up the CBO data, the CBO model. And it showed for the first five years, this thing burns a couple hundred billion dollars. And then there's some expectation that there'll be some sudden boom in revenue in the out years. And then you make the money back in the out years. So it's total accounting shenanigans for him to have made the claim in the first place that the IRA was actually going to be like a net deficit reduction or debt reduction. In fact, it's all just accounting shenanigans and it's just a massive spend package, particularly in the near term when it matters most.
顺便说一下，如果你们还记得，那个法案刚发布时我们谈到过这个问题。我还记得我找出了国会预算办公室的数据和模型。它显示在前五年，这个项目会烧掉几百亿美元。然后预计将会在未来几年里出现一些突然的收入增长，然后你可以在未来几年里赚回这笔钱。所以他在起初就声称INDIVIDUAL RETIREMENT ACCOUNT（个人退休储蓄计划）实际上将成为净赤字减少或债务减少是完全的会计骗局。事实上，这只是一个巨额支出计划，特别是在最需要的近期。
I think I told you guys this, but I think this was like, when was the last time I was in Washington? Probably, what is it March now? Maybe it was January, I was there. And I saw Schumer and Mark Warner and I spent about two hours with Manchin. He is really impressive. He's cool. He's interesting. He's thoughtful. He's moderate. Manchin's like a formidable guy. So this will be really interesting if he steps in there and try to take it on the bus.
我想我告诉过你们这个消息了，但我想这是最近我去华盛顿的时候，可能是一月份，因为现在是三月份吧。我在那儿见到了Schumer和Mark Warner，还和Manchin一起呆了大约两个小时。他真的很棒，很酷，很有趣，也很深思熟虑，是个温和派。Manchin是一个强有力的人物，如果他步入这场争斗，这将非常有趣。
Between Mickey Haley and Manchin, where do you write your check? I've probably write a check to both to be honest. Feels like a good ticket to me. I've always wanted to see the cross-con抗.
在米基·哈利和曼钦之间，你会往哪里写支票？说实话，我可能会同时写支票给两人。对我来说，这是一张好的选票。我一直都想看看双方的对抗。
Could you imagine a Democrat and Republican merging somehow and running together? It would be the greatest. My God. I've been pitching that for years. I think that's like a my God clear path. David Freiberg may have just come up with one of the most disruptive ideas in American politics that's ever been floated.
你能想象民主党和共和党以某种方式合并并一起执政吗？那将是最伟大的事情。我的天啊，我已经提出这个想法很多年了。我认为这是一个一清二楚的道路。大卫·弗赖伯格可能刚刚提出了美国政治中最具破坏性的想法。
Oh my God. Manchin, Haley, Haley, Manchin. Keep dreaming. Manchin, Haley, yeah.
哦，我的天啊。曼钦，海莉，海莉，曼钦。继续做梦吧。曼钦，海莉，没错。
Just to my comment on this.
就我对这个的评论来说，让我补充一点。
So first of all, I remember when Manchin did a good job stopping Biden's $3.5 trillion bill back better, remember it was him and cinema that were the holdouts. But then Manchin compromised and gave Biden a $750 billion version of it. And I guess now he's complaining that Biden didn't live up to his end of the bargain and doing the deficit reduction.
首先，我记得曼钦在阻止拜登的3.5万亿美元的“回归更好法案”上做得很好，记得当时他和辛玛没有同意。但后来，曼钦妥协了，给了拜登7500亿美元的版本。现在他抱怨拜登没有兑现减赤方面的协议。
But quite frankly, many commentators said at the time that the bill's claims deficit reduction were preposterous and that would never happen. So quite frankly, Manchin shouldn't have been eukered or hoodwinked by Biden. And everyone was basically saying, there'll never be any deficit reduction out of this bill. It's just more spending. So I don't really feel bad for Manchin here saying that somehow he was betrayed by Biden. He should have known better.
实话告诉你，很多评论员当时说，该法案声称会缩减赤字是荒谬的，永远不会发生。所以说，诚实地说，曼钦不应该被拜登愚弄或欺骗。每个人都基本上在说，这个法案永远不会减少赤字，只会增加支出。所以，我并不认为曼钦在这里感到难过，说他被拜登背叛了。他应该更明智地知道(Better known)。
Now, in terms of him running, yeah, I think as a Democrat who's figured out how to get himself elected in West Virginia, which is a plus 20 red state, he obviously knows how to appeal to the center. The problem for him is just how do you get the Democratic Party nomination? Because he's far to the right of your average Democratic Party voter. If he wants to run as an independent, that's a different story. And that would really throw a curveball into the race. But I don't see him doing that.
现在，就他参选的问题来说，我认为他是一个民主党人，知道如何在西弗吉尼亚州这个加20红色州赢得选举，所以他显然知道如何吸引中间派。问题在于，他如何获得民主党提名？因为他比一般民主党选民更靠右。如果他想作为独立候选人参选，那就是另外一回事了。这将给选举带来一个大转折。但我不认为他会这样做。
I think it's kind of a stretch. And this is the problem with a lot of these fantasy candidates is that, you know, centrist or moderate voters might like them, but they can't get the nomination. They're party. And let's get Trump and Obama. Those who are fantasy candidates.
我觉得这有点牵强。很多这样的幻想候选人的问题在于，中间派或温和派选民可能会喜欢他们，但他们却不能被提名。他们的党派。就像特朗普和奥巴马一样，他们是幻想候选人。
I don't think so. I mean, Trump was not a fantasy candidate. He's the ultimate. Well, he was an outsider. But he appealed to the party. He appealed to the base of the party. What I'm saying is in order to get the nomination of a major party, who have to appeal to its base. And I don't think mansion appeals to the base of the Democratic Party. He's out of step with it. He's out of step with it in ways that I like. Don't get me wrong. But I just, I don't see how he's going to get an nomination.
我不这么认为。我的意思是，特朗普不是一个幻想的候选人，他是终极王牌。他虽然是外部人员，但他吸引了共和党，吸引了党的基础成员。我的意思是，为了获得主要政党的提名，你必须吸引其基础成员。曼宁不符合民主党基础成员的要求，他没有跟上民主党的步伐，虽然我喜欢他这样，但我不知道他如何获得提名。
Chris Christie. What do you think of him? He seems like he's about to come in the race too, David.
你怎么看待克里斯·克里斯蒂呢？他似乎也要参加竞选了，大卫。
Pointless. He's just clever. He's just clutter. Okay.
他很聪明，但好像有点乱糟糟的。
All right, we all in podcast. It's like episode 100 something with me again today. The rain man himself. Yeah.
好的，我们在播客中一起进行。今天是第一百多集，和我一起的是下雨男本人。是的。
David Sacks is here. Friedberg is in his garden at his home in Paris. Spring has sprung the queen of Kenwa. And of course, the dictator himself, Chimoff, Polly Hoppatiya, the silver fox. Look at that little tough of silver hair. So distinguished.
大卫·萨克斯在这里。弗里德伯格在巴黎的家里的花园里。春天已经来临，肯瓦的女王绽放。当然，独裁者奇莫夫、波莉·霍帕蒂亚银狐。看看那一丝银色的头发。太有品位了。
I got a haircut from somebody recently who said that people go to her and ask her to put the silver thing in their hair. Really? I don't have to worry about that. Yeah.
我最近剪了头发，发型师说人们会找她让她帮忙给头发里面放那个银色的东西，真的吗？我不用担心这个。是啊。
Friedberg looks like he's in a smurf village there. What is that background?
弗里德伯格看起来就像在一个蓝精灵村里一样。那个背景是什么？
That is a scene from. Oh, okay. Like most of my backgrounds, I think it's like the mood in the moment of the week.
那是一幅画面。噢，好的。像我大多数的背景画面一样，我认为它反映这个星期当时的心情。
You guys just totally, totally denied half the beta males in the YouTube comments from being able to guess what the background. Thanks a lot.
你们刚刚完全地否定了YouTube评论区的一半beta男生猜测背景的可能性。谢谢你们。
Thanks for them. I did a reverse image search and then I used a chat GPT plugin to automatically figure out. I didn't know that was a game.
谢谢他们。我进行了反向图像搜索，然后使用了一个聊天GPT插件来自动解释。我不知道那是一个游戏。
Background each week. Oh, okay. All right.
每周的背景介绍是什么意思？哦，好的，没问题。
Well, let's get started. Come on. Let's get started.
好的，让我们开始吧。来吧，让我们开始。
Okay. Listen. I look at Sacks. I got going to get out of here. I got to get this. Yeah. The mouth is broken. The mouth is broken. Sounds like he's in a good mood. I like this.
好的。听我说。我看着萨克斯。我得离开这里。我得把这个搞定。是的。嘴巴坏了。听起来他心情不错。我喜欢这个。
Welcome to the world's greatest podcast. Open AI launched a bunch of chat GPT plugins. And I don't know if you saw it, but David Sacks wrote a blog post with chat GPT. It's an amazing back and forth. I read this back and forth. Explain what you did, Sacks. This was really one of the best conversations I've seen with chat GPT.
欢迎来到世界上最棒的播客。Open AI推出了一堆聊天GPT插件。我不知道你有没有看到，但David Sacks写了一篇关于聊天GPT的博客。这是一个令人惊叹的来回交流。我读了这个来回交流。Sacks，请解释一下你做了什么。这确实是我见过的最好的聊天GPT对话之一。
You know, pop it up here on the screen, but it looks like you did. Yeah.
你知道，把它弹出到屏幕上，但看起来你已经弄好了。嗯。
Well, I had an idea for a blog post about the use of a, I guess, tactic you could call gift to get. I thought it would be an interesting tactic for AI startups to use if they're trying to get a hold of proprietary training data.
嗯，我有一个关于利用一种叫做礼物策略来获得的博客文章的想法。我觉得这是一个有趣的策略，AI初创企业可以利用它来获取专有的训练数据。
So for example, if you wanted to create an architect AI, you need a lot of plans. Or if you're going to create like a doctor AI, you need a lot of lab results or medical reports to train the AI on. And those are hard to get. Open AI doesn't necessarily have them yet. So there is an opportunity, I think, for startups to create these AI's in different, you call them professional verticals.
举个例子，如果你想要创建一个建筑师的AI，你需要很多计划。或者如果你要创建像医生的AI，你需要很多实验结果或医疗报告来训练AI。而这些很难获取。Open AI现在并不一定有它们。所以我认为，有机会让初创企业在不同的专业领域创建这些人工智能的。
So the gift to get technique would be you give points to your users for uploading that data. And then they can spend those points by using the AI. And anyway, the company that came up with this gift to get tactic was a company called Jigsaw almost 20 years ago. No one remembers this company. I'm kind of dating myself because I remembered it.
所以获取技巧的礼物就是给你的用户上传数据的积分。然后他们可以使用AI来消费这些积分。而且，提出这个“获取礼物”策略的公司名叫Jigsaw，差不多有20年了。没人记得这家公司。我有点老了，因为我记得这个公司。
But I just had this idea. G.I. I wonder if the Jigsaw approach could be used for AI startups. So I started by going into chat GPT and I said, hey, have you heard of Jigsaw? And then it had. And then I said, tell me about its gift to get approach. And then I said, would this approach work for AI startups that want proprietary training data sets? And I said, yes, this is a good idea.
但是我刚刚想到一个想法。我在想 Jigsaw 方法是否可用于人工智能初创公司。所以我首先进入了聊天 GPT，并说，嘿，你听说过 Jigsaw 吗？然后它回答了我。然后我问，告诉我关于它的礼物获取方法。然后我说，这种方法是否适用于想要专有训练数据集的人工智能初创公司？然后我说，是的，这是一个好主意。
And then I gave the architect example and I said, can you give me more examples like this? And it gave me like 20 more examples. And then I asked it just to flesh out various kinds of details. I went down some cold attacks that didn't use. And then at the end, I said, can you summarize everything we've just talked about in a blog post? And it gave me the first draft of a blog post.
然后我举了个建筑师的例子，问他能不能给我更多类似的例子。他给了我大约20个例子。然后我请他进一步详细阐述各种细节。我列出了一些我不会使用的冷酷的攻击方法。最后，我问他能不能在一篇博客文章中总结我们刚才谈论的一切。他给了我草稿。
I then did a substantial amount of editing on most of the blog posts, although some of it I just used verbatim. And then I had a couple of people in my firm look at it. They made some good suggestions. So it's not like the human's completely out of the loop. And then I copy and paste in my edited version back into chat GPT said, here's my edit. And then I asked for some suggestions, it made a few small edits. And I said, okay, great, just incorporate the edits yourself, gave me that final output. And then I posted on Substaff.
我之后对大部分博客文章进行了相当数量的编辑，虽然其中一些我只是直接沿用。然后我请了几个同事看了一下。他们提出了一些很好的建议。所以不像是人完全不需要参与。之后我把编辑后的文章复制粘贴到 GPT 说的聊天框里，说“这是我的编辑版”。然后询问了一些建议，做了一些小修改。我说，“好的，太棒了，你们自己把修改加进去，给我最终版本。”然后我把它发布到 Substaff 上了。
A blog that probably would have taken me a week to research and write, if I had done it at all, I was able to do in a day. And I can't see myself going back now. I think this is just how I'm going to write all my blog posts is use chat GPT as my researcher as a writing partner. Some cases an editor, but I'm definitely going to run it through.
我可能需要一周的时间去研究和写作的博客，如果我真的写了的话，但是现在我能够在一天内完成。我看不到自己回到之前的写作方式了。我认为这就是我写所有博客文章的方式，使用聊天型GPT作为我的研究伙伴。在某些情况下还需要编辑，但是我肯定会运用这个工具。
The thing that I was struck by was just how kind and generous and thoughtful this conversation was. And I just thought, I've never seen SACs have a conversation where he was so kind to the other person and thoughtful right about now. Well, your friends and family are like, how do we get SACs to have this conversation with us?
我被震撼了的是，这次谈话是如此友善、慷慨和周到。我想，我从来没有见过 SACs 与别人如此友善和周到地交谈。你的朋友和家人会问：我们如何让 SACs 与我们有这样的对话呢？
You were super kind to the AI because it's not a person. It was a robot. Oh, no. Well, just in case it takes over the world, Jake, how you can't be too careful. But no, I think listen, it's important to give the AI. Look at his perfect. Perfect. Perfect. Perfect, no, no, no. I've never once gotten the things from SACs.
你对人工智能非常友善，因为它不是人，而是机器人。噢，不。万一它控制了世界，Jake，你不能太放心了。但是，我想听着，给AI好好对待是很重要的。看看它完美的表现。完美。完美。完美，不，不，不。我从来没有在SACs获得过这些东西。
Well, when have you ever used an explanation part? Scroll up and show that example. The AI actually gave me some information about Jake saw's point system. Again, the rewards that they used. Yeah. And it was just in text. So I said down below, hey, can you spit that out as a table? And it did instantly. It's like a day's work, right? Like you would have to have an analyst or research and do a days work. It's incredible. And then I just screenshot of that and I made it an exhibit in my dog.
嗯，你曾经使用过解释部分吗？滚动向上并展示那个例子。人工智能实际上给了我一些关于杰克·索的积分制的信息。再一次，这就是他们使用的奖励。是的，它只是文本。所以我在下面说，嘿，你能把这些变成一个表格吗？它瞬间就做到了。这就像一天的工作，对吧？你需要一个分析师或者研究人员做一天的工作。这太不真实了。然后我只是截了一张屏幕截图，把它作为我的演示材料。
You said thank you. Well, yeah. And then it was like delightful back to you. I mean, this is a road. Yes. This is a road. This is a literal road to you being a client human being. All the money that you've spent on therapy and just trying coaching to be nice to people, you're just nice, naturally. This is me.
你说了谢谢。嗯，是啊。然后就像是谢谢你一样令人愉悦。我的意思是，这是一条路。是的。这是一条路。这是通往你成为一个理想客户人的直接途径。你花费在治疗和尝试教练来变得友善的所有钱，你天生就是很友好的人。这就是我。
I think this is what I mean. This isn't a good mood today. I don't know why you're instigating him. He's laughing. Come on. It's fun. Thank you to the AI. Perfect. This is confirmatory of what we know. David wants to live in a set of highly transactional relationships, ideally with a machine. Who can then eventually help make him money?
我觉得我是这个意思。今天心情不好。我不知道你为什么要煽动他。他正在笑。来吧。这很有趣。非常感谢AI。完美。这证实了我们所知道的。大卫想要生活在一套高度交易的关系中，理想情况下是和机器在一起。然后最终能帮他赚钱？
Can I ask you a question of security, Sachs? What did you enjoy more? Working with your team of humans on this or working with chat GPT, which one was more enjoyable for you? Just personal. Well, I think they're both where. I would say that the human contributions were essential. So basically, I have more. It's not about enjoyment. It's about just a job to get done. But it definitely spent things up enormously.
Sachs，我能问您一个安全问题吗？您更喜欢什么？与人类团队一起工作还是与聊天GPT一起工作，哪个更让您愉快？这只是个人的看法。是的，我认为它们都很重要。我会说人类的贡献是必不可少的。所以基本上我更关注完成工作而不是享受工作。但这肯定极大地提升了事情的速度。
I personally find the hardest part of writing a blog is when you're staring at that blank sheet of paper and just having to like spit out the first thousand words. Yes. It's just so time consuming to do that. But again, if you start with the first draft, even if it's not very good, then you can just edit it and it's basically a blog. It's a great for ideation. But the country is a people in my car where important. Yeah.
在写博客的过程中，我个人认为最难的部分就是看着那一张空白的纸张，必须得说出前一千个字。没错。这样做太费时间了。但是，如果你从第一稿开始，即使它不是很好，你也可以进行编辑，最终形成博客。这对于创意构思非常有用。但是，国家的人民是我的车上的重要部分。是啊。
I actually trusted it. I know that you probably should fact check it in a way because it can't hallucinate. But the things that we're saying made so much sense to me that I didn't think it was hallucinating. Well, this is a great moment to pivot into what open and I did with plugins.
其实我信任它。我知道你们可能需要核实一下它的真实性，因为它不可能是幻觉。但是我们说的话对我来说非常有道理，我不认为它是幻觉。好的，现在是一个很好的时机来谈谈我们和插件一起做的事情。
These came fast and furious this week. A bunch of folks who had started verticalized chat GPT based projects, MVPs were like, oh, maybe my project MVP is now dead because Instacart OpenTable Shopify Slack and Zapier obviously, if this then that is a very wide-raging tool that allows you to connect APIs from a multitude of sources.
这个星期，这些变化来得很快也很急。一大群人们开展了垂直化聊天GPT项目，MVP的情况就像是说，哦，也许我的MVP项目已经死了，因为Instacart、OpenTable、Shopify、Slack和Zapier毫无疑问是非常广泛的工具，它可以让你连接来自众多来源的API。
What this all let you do at the end of the day is have chat GPT ping one of these sources, just like an app might do or some custom software might do ping the API and return data.
归根结底，这一切让你做到的就是让聊天 GPT 接触这些来源之一，就像某些应用程序或定制软件可能会做的那样，它会 ping API 并返回数据。
What tables are open on OpenTable, maybe Shopify, find me things to buy in this category, etc.
OpenTable上有哪些餐桌是空着的，或许Shopify可以找到这个品类里的我想买的东西。
People have started building little scripts. We used to call these when magic leap was out Internet agents and the concept of a software agent that's existed for a long time actually in computer science.
人们已经开始制作一些小脚本。在魔法跳跃出现之前，我们常常称之为“互联网代理人”，而软件代理的概念实际上在计算机科学中已经存在很长时间了。
I'm sure free-book will give us some examples of that. But also chat GPT can now use a browser.
我相信免费的书籍会给我们一些例子。但现在聊天GPT也可以在浏览器中使用。
That means you can get around the dated nature of the content in the corpus. Somebody did things like, hey, build me a meal plan, book me a reservation for Friday night, in OpenTable, source other ingredients and buy it for Saturday night on Insta, Carten then use something like Wolfram Alpha to calculate the calories, etc.
这意味着你可以绕开语料库内容的陈旧性。有些人会做一些事情，比如，“帮我规划一顿饭，预订星期五晚上的餐厅（用OpenTable），在Insta上寻找其他食材并购买它们，在Wolfram Alpha等工具上计算热量等等。”
When you saw all this drop, what did you think in terms of the opportunity for startups and to build these intelligent agents, things that will do if this then that or just background tasks over time and you can actually leave them running.
当你看到这一切的跌落时，你是否考虑到了初创企业的机会，以及构建这些智能代理的机会，这些代理可以执行类似“如果这样，就做那样”或长时间的后台任务，并且你甚至可以让它们持续运行。
Yeah, I think this is the most important developer platform since iPhone and the launch of iOS in the App Store and I would argue maybe ever in our industry, certainly since the beginning of the Internet.
是啊，我认为这是自iPhone和iOS在应用商店的推出以来最重要的开发者平台。我甚至可以说，这可能是我们行业史上最重要的平台，至少是自互联网诞生以来如此。
I think there was a question when chat GPT launched on November 30th and people started playing with in December, what exactly OpenAI's product strategy was going to be?
我想当GPT在11月30日发布并在12月份开始使用时，人们对OpenAI的产品策略会有疑问。具体说，OpenAI的产品策略是什么？
Was this just like a proof of concept or a demo and they even called it like a demo and initially it looked like what their business model was going to be was providing an intelligence API that other websites, other applications could incorporate and we saw some really cool demos like that notion demo of other applications incorporating AI capabilities.
这是一个概念证明或演示吗？他们甚至称之为演示，最初看起来他们的商业模式将是提供一个智能API，其他网站、其他应用程序都可以整合，我们看到了一些非常酷的演示，例如那个应用程序整合了AI功能的概念演示。
So initially it looked like what OpenAI was going to be was more like Stripe where in the same way that Stripe made payments functionality available very easily through a developer platform, they were going to make AI capabilities available through their developer platform and then I think a funny thing happened on the way to this announcement which is they became the fastest growing application of all time talking about chat GPT over 100 million users in two months.
开始看起来，OpenAI 更像是 Stripe，就像 Stripe 通过开发者平台很容易地使付款功能可用一样，他们将通过他们的开发者平台提供人工智能功能，但在这一宣布之前，我认为有一件有趣的事情发生了，他们成为最快增长的应用程序之一，谈论了在两个月内超过 1 亿用户的聊天 GPT。
Nobody else has ever done that before. I think it took the iPhone, you know two years plus Gmail, Google, those products all took I think well over a year.
没有其他人在这之前做过这件事。我认为，iPhone 花费了两年时间， Gmail、Google 这些产品都花费了超过一年的时间。
So this became the fastest growing site of all time and I think with plugins what they're indicating is that they will become a destination site.
所以这成为了史上发展最快的网站，我认为他们想要通过插件让它成为一个目的地网站。
This is not just a developer platform, this is a destination site and through plugins they are now incorporating the ability to basically, you know, anything you could do through an application, you will now be able to do through a plugin.
这不仅仅是开发平台，这是一个旅游目的地网站，现在借助插件，您可以基本上做任何您可以通过应用程序做的事情，现在都可以通过插件完成。
You'll just tell chat GPT what you want done. If you say, hey, book me a plane ticket on this date. We'll go into kayak's plugin and do that.
你只需告诉聊天 GPT 你想完成什么任务。如果你说，“嘿，给我订一张飞机票，在这个日期。” 我们就会进入 kayak 的插件来完成这个任务。
You say book me a plane ticket and an Airbnb for this trip. So the problem of Siri and Alexa realized because those were very rigid, they had no intelligence right?
你说帮我订一张机票和一家Airbnb，所以Siri和Alexa的问题就在于它们非常僵硬，没有智能对吧？
Friedberg, if you wanted Siri to do something specific like use ways or to go get you an open table, it needed to be pretty specific and it didn't have any kind of natural language model behind it.
如果你想让Siri做一些特定的事情，比如使用Ways或去找一个空桌子，就需要非常具体，而且它没有任何自然语言模型的支持。要是 Friedberg。
So this is taking existing APIs and putting a natural language layer in front of it which makes it, you know, perform a little more naturally.
所以，这是将现有的 API 放在自然语言层之前，使其更自然地执行。
Is that what we're seeing here, Friedberg? I think it provides access to a corpus of data and a suite of services that are not well integrated into a search or chat interface anywhere today.
弗里德伯格，我们看到的就是这样吗？我认为它提供了一个数据语料库和一套服务的访问，这些都没有很好地集成到任何搜索或聊天界面中。
So you know, knowing what restaurants have, what seats available is in a closed service.
你知道的，了解餐厅菜单和有哪些座位是一个封闭的服务。
It's in a data warehouse operated by an open table.
它在一个由开放式表格操作的数据仓库中。
And now what open table can do is provide an API into that data via an interface and make an allow chat GPT to make a request to figure that data out to give a response to a user where they can ultimately benefit from transacting and allowing a service.
现在Open Table可以通过一个接口向数据提供API，并允许聊天GPT发出请求以确定数据，以便向用户提供响应，从而最终受益于交易和使用服务。
This closes the loop between search and commerce in a way that Google cannot and does not do today.
这样做可以将搜索和商业之间的循环封闭起来，这是谷歌今天无法也不会做到的。
And I think that's what makes it very powerful. We've seen this attempted in a number of important ways in the last couple of years with Alexa and Apple Home and Google Home kind of integration via the chat services that they offer, you know, where you speak to the device.
我认为这是它变得非常强大的原因。在过去的几年中，我们曾见到亚历克斯、苹果家庭和谷歌家庭在它们所提供的语音服务整合方面做出了一些重要的尝试，你知道，你可以通过与设备交谈来实现。
But the deep integration that's possible now and the natural language way that you can go from the request all the way through to the transaction is what makes this so extremely powerful.
但是现在可能的深度集成以及您可以从请求一直到交易的自然语言方式是使这一切极其强大的原因。
And I think, you know, the points I made a few weeks ago when we first talked about, you know, search having so many searches that are done where the human computer interface presents a table or presents a chart or presents a shopping list in a matrix.
我觉得，你知道的，几周前我们第一次讨论搜索的时候，我提到了很多搜索结果以表格、图表或购物清单的形式呈现在人机界面上的情况。如果需要的话，我可以改一下说法。
That's what makes search such a defensible product.
这就是使得搜索成为一个具有防御性的产品的原因。
I think could theoretically be completely obviated or destroyed with an interface like this where you can write the ability for chat GPT or whatever the core centralized services to actually present results in a table in a matrix in an interface in a shopping list and actually close the transaction loop.
我认为，通过这样一个界面，你可以编写聊天GPT或任何核心集中服务的能力，实际将结果以表格或矩阵的形式呈现在界面中、购物清单中，并实际完成交易循环，这个理论上可以完全消除或摧毁。
It's really disruptive to things like commerce providers. It's really disruptive, you know, some of these commerce platforms, it's really disruptive to a lot of different industries, but also introduces a lot of real opportunity to build on top of that capability and that functionality to rewrite and ultimately make things easier and better for consumers on the internet.
这真的会很扰乱像商业提供商这样的事情。你知道，一些这样的商业平台真的会扰乱很多不同的行业，但也会带来很多真正的机会，以利用那种能力和功能，改写并最终让互联网上的消费者更容易更好地享受服务。
What do you think, Timothy, you're looking at this and it seems to be moving at a very fast pace over 100 million users. They put a business model on it already 20 bucks a month. They have a secondary business model of, hey, use the API and we'll charge you for usage.
你认为呢，提摩西，你看着这个，它似乎正在以超过一亿用户的非常快的速度增长。他们已经为其制定了一个商业模式，每月收取20美元的费用。他们还有一个次要的商业模式，就是使用API，我们会根据使用量收费。
And then you layer on what Zapier and if this then that had already sort of established in the world, which is APIs, but nobody ever really wanted to write scripts. So that seemed to be the blocker. You go into Zapier if this and that. It's where 5% of the audience, people who want to customize stuff, people who want to tinker, but this seems to now with the chat GPT chat interface, open it up to a lot of people.
然后你加上Zapier和if this then that已经在世界上建立起来的API，但没有人真正想编写脚本。所以那似乎是阻碍。进入if this then that的Zapier。这是5%的受众，那些想要自定义东西，想要玩弄的人，但现在似乎通过GPT聊天界面打开了很多人的视野。
So is this super significant or is this a commodity product that, you know, 10 people will have, we're sitting here next year on all in episode 220.
这个有多重要呢？是不是一种普通常见的产品，只有10个人会有呢？我们可能明年在第220个全是节目中还坐在这里呢。
I think you are asking the exact right question and you use the great term like in poker, if there are three hearts on the board and you have the ace of hearts, you have what's called the nut blocker, right? Which means that nobody else, even if anybody else has a flush, they never have the best flush.
我觉得你问了一个非常恰当的问题，并且你使用了很棒的词汇，就像在扑克中，如果桌面上有三张红桃牌，而你手里有红桃A，你就拥有所谓的“坚果封堵器”，对吧？这意味着即使其他人也有同花顺，他们也从未拥有最好的同花顺。
And if flush is the best hand, there's a lot of ways that you can manipulate the pot and eventually win the pot because you have that ace of hearts and nobody else has it. The concept of blocker, I think is very important to understand here, which is what are the real blockers for this capability to not be broadly available.
如果同花是最好的牌，你可以用多种方法操纵奖池并最终赢得奖池，因为你有红心A，而其他人都没有。我认为理解挡手的概念非常重要，即哪些是真正的挡手，以使这种能力不会广泛存在。
So I think you have to segregate. You have the end user destination. You have the language model and then you have the third party services.
我认为你需要进行分离。你需要有最终用户的目的地。你需要有语言模型，然后你需要有第三方服务。
And so if you ask the question, what is the incentive of the third party service? Well, the shareholders of a travel site, right? They're not interested in doing an exclusive deal with any distribution endpoint. They want their services integrated as broadly as possible, right? So I think the answer for the service providers is just like they build an app for iOS and for Google. And, you know, if they could have justified it, they would have built an app for a gaming console. They can. They should. They would. They do.
那么，如果你问第三方服务的激励是什么？那么，旅游网站的股东，对吧？他们对与任何分销端达成独家协议不感兴趣。他们想要将自己的服务尽可能广泛地集成，对吧？因此，我认为服务提供商的答案就像他们为iOS和Google构建应用程序一样。你知道的，如果他们可以证明，他们会为游戏控制台构建一个应用程序。他们能够。他应该。他们愿意。他们就这么做了。
So that's going to get commoditized and broadly available. I think on the LLM side, I think we've talked about this. Everybody's converging on each other.
这样会变得非常通俗易懂并且广泛可用。我认为在LLM方面，我们已经谈论过这个问题。大家都越来越趋于一致了。
In fact, there was an interesting article that was released that said that there was a handful of Google engineers that quit because apparently Bard was actually learning on top of chat GPT, which they felt was either legal or unethical or something, right?
实际上，有一篇有趣的文章发布了，说有一小部分谷歌工程师辞职了，因为据说巴德在聊天GPT的基础上进行了学习，而他们认为这可能是非法或不道德的，对吧？
So the point is, I think we've talked about this for a while, but all of these models will converge in the absence of highly unique data, right? What I've been calling these white truffles. So if you can hoard white truffles, your model will be better. Otherwise your model will be the same as everybody else's model.
所以，我的意思是，我认为我们已经谈论了一段时间，但所有这些模型在缺乏高度独特的数据时将会趋同，是吧？我一直在称这些为白松露。所以，如果你能囤积白松露，你的模型就会更好。否则，你的模型将与其他人的模型相同。
And then you have the distribution endpoints of which there are many whose economic incentives are very high, right? So Facebook doesn't want to just sit around and have all this traffic go to chat GPT. They want to be able to enable Instagram users and WhatsApp users and Facebook users to interact through Messenger. What have you? Obviously, Google has, you know, many hundreds of billions of reasons to defend their territory.
然后你有许多经济刺激非常高的分发节点，对吧？所以Facebook不想只是坐在那里让所有流量都流向聊天GPT。他们想要让Instagram用户、WhatsApp用户和Facebook用户能够通过Messenger进行互动。有没有？显然，Google有许多百亿个理由来捍卫他们的领土。
So I think all of this to me just means that these are really important use cases as an investor. I think it's important to just stay a little patient because it's not clear to me that there are any natural blockers. But I do think that David's right that it's demonstrating a use case that's important. But it's still so early. We are six weeks in.
我认为，对于我作为一名投资者来说，这些都是非常重要的用例。我想要提醒大家要耐心一些，因为目前我并没有发现任何自然的限制。但是我认为David所说的是正确的，这展示了一个重要的应用案例。但是，现在还为时过早。我们只有六周的时间。
Yeah, I tell you, I think there's a couple of great blockers here where there's going to be an M&A Bonanza for Silicon Valley.
是啊，我告诉你，我认为这里存在几个很好的障碍，将会引发硅谷的并购狂潮。
If you look at certain data sets, Reddit, Stack Overflow for programming and Cora, these things are going to be worth a fortune and to be able to buy those or get exclusive licenses to those if you're maybe Google Bored or if you're a chat GPT, that could be a major difference make or Twitter's data set, obviously.
如果你看一些数据集，比如Reddit、编程的Stack Overflow和Cora，这些将会变为财富，如果你是谷歌的老板，或者是聊天机器人GPT，你买到这些或者获得独家授权可能会带来巨大的差距，显而易见，还有Twitter的数据集。
And then you look at certain tools like Zapier and if this and that, they've spent a decade building the sort of meta API. That would be an incredible blocker.
然后你看看像 Zapier 这样的工具，如果不是这样那样的话，他们已经花了十年建立这种元 API。这可能会是一个难以克服的障碍。
I think this is going to be like a blockalization of so many all sorts of things. Zapier and Intifree, they'd have plugged into free. Exactly.
我觉得这可能会像许多各种各样的东西的块状化一样。Zapier和Intifree，它们已经接入免费服务了。没错。
I was just going to say, I don't think these are not blockers. I don't think this is the ace of hearts of a flush board. I don't think so.
我刚要说的是，我不认为这些是阻塞点。我不认为这是同花顺板的红心A，我觉得不是。
I think that these things are really interesting assets. They are definitely, truffly in nature, but they may not be the 10 pound white trouble from Alba that we're looking for. But on the M&A side, don't you think this would be like incredible?
我觉得这些东西真的是非常有趣的资产。它们肯定是真实的，但它们可能不是我们寻找的阿尔巴10磅白色麻烦。但从并购方面来看，你不认为这将是不可思议的吗？
But the only reason I say that again is it is just so early. In the text I mentioned this to you guys. I remember and Sachs and I were in the middle of this.
但我再次说这个的唯一原因是现在还太早。在之前的文本中，我向你们提到过这个。我还记得我和萨克斯在那个时候正在进行中。
We were both right at the beginning of social networking. Sachs started Genie. I was in the middle of AIM. And all of a sudden we saw Reed start social net. Then we saw Forenster get started. Then we saw Myspace get started. And you have to remember when you look back now 20 years later, the winner was the 7th company, which was Facebook, not the 1st, not the 2nd. It was the 7th, which started 2 1 1 2 half years properly after the entire Webpoint 2.0 phenomenon started.
我们在社交网络刚开始的时候都很正确。 Sachs 创立了 Genie，我则在 AIM 中间。突然间，我们看到 Reed 开始了社交网，接着 Forenster 开始了，然后是 Myspace 的兴起。当你现在回望这20年的历史，你必须记住，胜者是第7个公司 - Facebook，不是第1个，也不是第二个。是第7个，它在整个 Webpoint 2.0 现象开始之后的2年零2个半年开始。
The same was searched by the way, where Google was probably 20% to the scene. If you want to be a real student of business history, I'll just say something that's more meta, which is if there's something that I've learned on the heels of this SVB fiasco, because there is an enormous amount of negative perception of Silicon Valley and frankly, a lot of disdain for VCs and prognosticating technologists.
同样的搜索方式被使用，其中谷歌可能占到了场景的20％。如果你想成为真正的商业历史学家，我只想说一些更加元的东西，那就是如果我从SVB的惨案中学到了一些东西，那就是硅谷存在着巨大的负面印象，坦白地说，对于风险投资家和技术预言家存在很多不屑之情。
And I think that we have to be very careful. Yeah. I do think that we are an example of that because we are the bright, shiny object of the people that were successful. And the broad makeup of America thinks that we're not nearly as smart as we all think we are.
我认为我们必须非常小心。是的，我确实认为我们是这个例子，因为我们是成功者眼中的亮丽、闪耀之物。而美国这个广大的组成部分认为我们远没有我们自认为的那么聪明。
And after all of this money that's been burned in crypto land and NFTs and all of this Web 3 nonsense, to yet again whip up the next hype cycle, I think doesn't serve us well. So I do think there's something very important here, but I think if we want to maintain reputational capital through this cycle, because government will get involved much faster in this cycle, I think it's important to just be methodical and thoughtful, iterate, experiment, but it's too early to call it, I guess is what I would say.
在加密和NFT以及所有这些Web 3无聊的事物中烧掉了这么多钱，又一次引起了下一个炒作周期，我认为这对我们并不有益。因此，我认为这里有一些非常重要的东西，但如果我们想通过这个周期保持声誉资本，因为政府将在这个周期中更快地介入，我认为只有方法上和思考上是非常重要的，迭代，实验，但现在还为时过早，我想这就是我想说的。
Yeah, it's definitely too early to call it, but SAC you're saying explicitly you think this is bigger than the internet itself, bigger than mobile as a platform shift. It's definitely top three and I think it might be the biggest ever.
是的，毫无疑问现在还为时过早，但SAC明确表示认为这比互联网本身、移动平台转型都要更大。肯定是前三之一，我认为可能是有史以来最大的。
I think look, I think things could certainly play out the way that Jamoth is saying. However, I actually think that OpenAI has demonstrated now with these platform features that it has a lead, a substantial lead, and I actually think that lead is likely to grow in the next year.
我觉得看起来，Jamoth所说的事情确实可能会发生。然而，我实际上认为OpenAI现在通过这些平台功能已经证明了它的领先地位，而且我认为这种领先地位很可能会在未来一年内继续增长。
And let me tell you why. I think it's got a couple of assets here that are hard to replicate. So number one, user attention. I think they've now got, I would guess hundreds of millions of users and this thing is caught on like wildfire. It must have been beyond their wildest dream. I think it'd even surprise them how much this has taken off.
让我告诉你为什么。我觉得这款产品有几个优点是不容易复制的。首先，用户关注度。我想他们现在有数亿用户，这件事像野火一样迅速传播。这肯定超出了他们的想象。我认为他们甚至会惊讶于这个产品的成功程度。
It's really captured the public's imagination and people are discovering new use cases for it every day. If you are sort of the number two or number three or the seventh large language model to basically get deployed behind a chatbot, I just don't think you're going to get that kind of distribution because the novelty factor will have worn off and people will have already kind of learned to use chat GBT.
它真的征服了公众的想象力，人们每天都在发现新的用例。如果你算是第二个或第三个或第七个大型语言模型，在聊天机器人后基本上得到部署，我认为你不会得到那种分发，因为新奇因素已经消失了，人们已经学会使用聊天GBT。
So number one is the hundreds of millions of eyeballs. Number two is with this developer platform, I think we should describe a couple of other features of it. One of the problems with chat GBT if you've used it is that the training data ends in 2021.
第一项是亿万眼球。第二项是，有了这个开发平台，我认为我们应该描述一些其他功能。如果你用过 Chat GBT，你会发现其中一个问题是训练数据截止于2021年。
And so you very rapidly, for many questions, get to a stopping point where it says, like, I don't know the answer to that because I don't have any information about the last two years. Well, one of the plugins that OpenAI is introduced to itself is called the browsing plugin and it allows chat GBT to go search the internet and not just run internet searches but to run an internet search as if it were a human.
因此，对许多问题，您很快就会达到一个阻止点，因为它会说：“我不知道答案，因为我没有有关过去两年的任何信息。” OpenAI引入了一个名为浏览插件的插件，它允许聊天GBT搜索互联网，而不仅仅是运行互联网搜索，而是像人类一样运行互联网搜索。
So you ask, you ask chat GBT a question and it runs a search and then it scours through the list of 20 links and it doesn't stop until it finds a good answer and then it comes back to you with just the answer. So it actually saves you the time of clicking through all those loops and it will give you the browsing history to show you what it did.
所以，你提出问题给GBT聊天机器人，它运行搜索，然后扫描20个链接的列表，直到找到一个好的答案，并将答案返回给你。这实际上节省了你挨个点击所有循环的时间，并且会给你浏览记录，以展示它做了什么。
That's mind blowing. They also have a thing called a retrieval API which allows developers to share proprietary knowledge bases with chat GBT. So if you have a company knowledge base or some other kind of content, you can share with chat GBT so that chat GBT can be aware of that and there are some privacy concerns but the company is said they're going to sandbox that data and protect it.
真是让人惊叹！他们还拥有一个叫做检索API的东西，可以让开发者与聊天GBT共享专有知识库。所以，如果你有公司的知识库或其他类型的内容，你可以与聊天GBT分享，从而让聊天GBT意识到这些内容，尽管存在一些隐私问题，但公司表示会将这些数据隔离并保护它。
As an example, I'm planning on writing a book on SAS using chat GBT and I'm going to put together all the previous articles and talks I've done as a database so I can then work with that in chat GBT. So you're going to have more and more developers sharing information with chat GBT. You're going to have chat GBT able to update its training based on sort of the last two years, be able to search the internet.
举个例子，我打算用chat GBT写一本有关SAS的书，并将我之前写的所有文章和演讲整合成数据库，以便我可以在chat GBT上一起使用。因此，越来越多的开发人员将与chat GBT分享信息。chat GBT将能够根据过去两年的数据更新自己的培训，并能够搜索互联网上的信息。
And I think that as those hundreds of millions of users use the product and as developers keep sharing more and more of these data sets, the AI is going to get smarter and smarter. And then what's going to happen is both consumers and developers are going to want to use or build on the smartest API. Yeah, so this is where it feeds on itself.
我认为，随着这些数以亿计的用户使用这个产品，以及开发人员继续分享越来越多的这些数据集，人工智能将变得越来越智能。然后会发生的是，消费者和开发人员都会想要使用或构建最智能的 API。嗯，这就是一个互相促进的关系。
I mean, I think there might be a, I agree with much of what you're saying, but I do think somebody like Facebook, when they release their language model, which they're about to, is not going to allow chat GBT to have any access to the Facebook Corpus of data and then LinkedIn will do the same. They'll block any access to chat GBT to their data. And so then you might say, you know what? I'm doing something related to business and business contacts. I need to use the LinkedIn one and they're just going to block other people's usage.
我的意思是，我觉得你说的很多话我都同意，但是我认为像Facebook这样发布他们的语言模型的公司，他们将不允许chat GBT获取Facebook数据的访问权，LinkedIn也会做同样的事情。他们将阻止chat GBT获取他们的数据。所以你可能会说，你知道吗？我在做和商业和商业联系相关的事情。我需要使用LinkedIn，他们将只允许特定的人使用。
I mean, tell you, hey, you have to come to our interface and have a pro account on LinkedIn. And this all becomes little islands of data. And so I'm not sure that you may be right to call us too early to have a definitive opinion. But I would say you have to believe plugins are going to be promiscuous. Yes, there's actually plugins or the refutation of your idea.
我是说，听我说，嘿，你必须来到我们的界面并在领英上拥有专业账户。这一切都成为小小的数据岛。所以我不确定你是否有权利提前对我们的观点做出明确的看法。但我认为你必须相信插件将会很杂乱无章。是的，插件或许可以反驳你的想法。
Facebook does not have an API Twitter turned off their API. People who are smart with data sets, Cora doesn't let people use its data. So I just picked three. Those are three incredible data sets that don't allow people and Craigslist doesn't. So people who are smart do not allow APIs into their data. They keep it for themselves.
Facebook没有API，Twitter关闭了他们的API。智能处理数据集的人们，Cora不允许人们使用它的数据。所以我只选择了三种。这三种都是不可思议的数据集，不允许人们使用，Craigslist也一样。所以那些聪明的人不会让API接入他们的数据。他们会将其保留给自己。
I think there were a lot of people when the App Store rolled out that swore up and down. They never built a mobile app because they didn't want to give Apple that kind of power that the internet was open. Whereas the App Store is closed and created by Apple. And sure enough, they all at the end of the day had to roll out apps. Even though in the case of Facebook, it definitely has made them vulnerable because they're downstream of Apple. I mean, Apple now has enormous influence over Facebook's advertising revenue because users have to go through Apple. They never had to do that before the internet. Nonetheless, Facebook felt compelled to release a mobile app because they knew it was existential for them if they didn't.
我认为在App Store推出时有许多人发誓坚决不会构建移动应用程序，因为他们不想让苹果拥有互联网的那种力量，而App Store是由苹果创建的封闭的市场。但最终他们都不得不推出应用程序，即使在Facebook的情况下，它肯定使他们变得更脆弱，因为他们是Apple的下游。我的意思是，现在苹果对Facebook的广告收入影响巨大，因为用户必须通过苹果进行操作。而互联网之前他们从来不用这样做。尽管如此，Facebook觉得自己必须发布移动应用程序，因为他们知道如果不这样做，对他们的生存至关重要。
And I believe that what's happening is. I think that's one. I don't think it's right now as you. The right now as you would be Google Search does Facebook does Craigslist allow their data to be indexed inside of Google Search answers. No, right? They block that for a reason. And they will write a season to season letter. So you know what? Those guys will stay out of it. But look how much content Google Search already has.
我认为目前的情况是这样的。我认为这并不像你目前想的那样。像 Google 搜索、Facebook、Craigslist 这些网站都不允许他们的数据在 Google 搜索答案中被索引。他们为什么这样做呢？显然他们是为了保护自己的服务。所以，他们会以季度为单位写一封信给 Google，告诉他们不要索引他们的数据。但是，看看 Google 搜索上已经有多少内容了！
And I think that ChatGPT will start by eating a substantial portion of search because again, you don't have to go through the 20 links. It just gives you the answer. It's going to eat a substantial portion of browser usage and app usage because you're just going to tell ChatGPT what you want to do. It will go book your plane ticket. It will go book your hotel room.
我认为ChatGPT会通过吃掉相当多的搜索开始，因为再也不需要点开二十个链接了，它会直接给你答案。ChatGPT会占据相当大的浏览器使用和app使用，因为你只需告诉ChatGPT你想进行什么操作，它会帮你预订飞机票和酒店房间。
Yeah, see this is. Another part we want to play in this. Hold on, the apps that want to play in this will benefit. So there will be a powerful incentive for applications to get an advantage by participating. Let me finish my point. And then eventually they will be forced to do it not because they get an advantage but because they're so competitively disadvantaged if they don't participate in that ecosystem.
是这样的，这是我们想要参与的另一部分。那些想要参与的应用将会受益，因此参与将会有强大的激励。让我说完我的观点。最终，他们将被迫参与进来，不是因为得到了优势，而是因为如果他们不参与这个生态系统，他们将在竞争上处于劣势。
I agree that they'll participate in it. But here's the thing. What's going to happen is Google is going to turn on Bard and I've been playing with Bard. It is 80% of ChatGPT already. And then when they make Bard a default, you know, little snippet on your Google Search Return page or Bard is built into YouTube or Chrome or Android, all the Play Store.
我同意他们将参与其中。但事情是这样的。Google将打开Bard，而我一直在使用Bard。它已经是ChatGPT的80％了。然后当他们将Bard设为默认选项时，在您的Google搜索结果页面上，或者Bard内置于YouTube或Chrome或Android或所有播放商店中时。
They are going to roll right over ChatGPT because they have billions of users already. So this advantage that you see today, I see that getting rolled real quick because you'll be on YouTube and on the top right hand side will be Bard. And when you do a search, it's going to say, here are other sentences you could do.
他们将很快碾压ChatGPT，因为他们已经拥有数十亿的用户。所以今天你看到的这个优势，我看到会很快被消灭，因为你将在YouTube上，右上角将是Bard。当你搜索时，它会说，这里还有其他你可以选择的句子。
Oh, you want to search Mr. Beast when he's helped people or Mr. Beast when he's given away more money or people who've copied and been inspired by Mr. Beast. All that's going to occur inside of YouTube and ChatGPT is not going to have access to the YouTube corpus of data. And then when you do a search, it's going to be the same thing. It's going to be on the right hand side and it's going to be playing just like it isn't being.
哦，您想搜索Mr. Beast帮助人们或Mr. Beast捐赠更多钱或受到Mr. Beast启发并复制的人。所有这些都将在YouTube内发生，ChatGPT无法访问YouTube语料库数据。当您进行搜索时，它将是相同的情况。它将在右侧播放，就像现在一样。
If you turn on your Android phone, they're going to make Google Assistant go right into Bard. And Google Assistant is already used by hundreds of millions of people. So I think that Google will roll. I think they're going to roll ChatGPT. I don't know who's going to win, but I'm looking at this Saxipu more reductively as a capitalist, which is what are people's incentives because that's what they'll do.
如果你打开你的安卓手机，他们将立即进入Bard模式使用Google Assistant。Google Assistant已经被数以百万计的人使用。因此我认为谷歌会继续推出。我认为他们会继续推出ChatGPT。我不知道谁将会胜出，但是我以资本主义者的视角来看待这个问题，即人们的动机是什么，他们就会这样做。
Google's incentive is to use ChatGPT's usage by inserting something inside of their existing distribution channels to suppress the ability for you to want to go to the app. Known as bundling, I think Facebook has that same incentive. Oddly, even though Microsoft is such a deep partner, I think certain assets of Microsoft have that incentive. You're talking collectively about $5 or $6 trillion of market cap. Then when you add in Alexa and Amazon and Siri and Apple, what is their incentive?
谷歌的动机是利用现有的分销渠道，在其中插入一些内容，从而抑制你前往应用程序的欲望。这被称为捆绑销售，我认为 Facebook 也有同样的动机。令人奇怪的是，即使微软是谷歌的深度合作伙伴，但我认为微软的某些资产也有这个动机。综合来说，这些公司的市值约为5或6万亿美元。然后，如果加上亚马逊的 Alexa、亚马逊、Siri 和苹果，它们的动机是什么？
I don't think their incentive is to let this happen. I think if you look at the Slack Microsoft Teams example of even a better engineer product who's excellent and widely deployed, even at hundreds of millions of users doesn't much matter when it's more cleverly distributed and priced. Those things again, you may still be right. All I'm saying is it's just so early to know. As slow and lumbering as some of these big companies are, they are not so stupid as to kill their own golden goose and or defend it when threatened. I think you just have to let it see what happens.
我不认为他们的动机是让这件事发生。我觉得如果你看看 Slack 和微软团队的例子，即使拥有更好的工程师产品，优秀且广泛部署的产品，即使拥有数亿用户也不太重要，当它被更巧妙地分配和定价时。这些事情可能还是正确的。我只是想说，现在还太早了，我们还不知道。尽管一些大公司行动缓慢而笨拙，但他们并不是那么愚蠢，会杀死他们自己的金鹅或在受到威胁时为其辩护。我认为你只需要看看会发生什么。
I want to first point on Google and then we can move on to the bundling thing. Let me just make the counter argument, which is that I think Google has caught completely flat-footed here, even though they shouldn't have been because they published the original paper on Transformers in 2017. They should have seen where all of this was going, but they didn't. Open AI, use that paper and commercialized it.
我想先谈一下Google，然后我们再继续讨论捆绑问题。让我反驳一下，我认为Google在这里完全措手不及，尽管他们不应该这样，因为他们在2017年发布了有关变形金刚的原始论文。他们应该看到这一切的发展趋势，但他们并没有。Open AI使用了那篇论文，并进行了商业化。
The proof of that is there was just a lawsuit a couple of days ago or at least a claim by a former employee of Google who quit because he said that they were using chat GPT to train their AI. Their AI is so far behind. They were violating the terms of use. They were violating the terms of use of open AI to train their own AI on chat GPT. That's not a good sign. That's not a good sign.
证据就在于几天前刚刚有一起诉讼，或者至少有一名谷歌前雇员声称因为他们使用聊天GPT来训练自己的AI而辞职。他们的AI距离先进还很远。他们正在违反使用条款，违反使用开源AI训练自己的AI。这不是一个好兆头，这不是一个好兆头。
I always think it's hold on. Hold on. Hold on. I'm just being the counter argument here. I mean, don't dismiss it out of hand. Give me a chance to explain it. Moreover, chat GPT-4, which was just released a few weeks ago, we know that open AI had that. They were using it internally for seven months. The state of the art is not what we're using. Open AI has internally. They're obviously working now on chat GPT-5. If you're saying that BARD is 80% of chat GPT-4, well, I got news for you. It's probably 50% or 20% of chat GPT-5.
我常常认为需要坚持下去。等等，等等。我只是在提出一个反对的观点。我的意思是，不要轻易驳斥我的观点。给我一个解释的机会。此外，我们知道Open AI在几周前刚刚发布了聊天GPT-4，他们在内部使用了七个月。我们使用的不是最先进的技术。Open AI正在研发聊天GPT-5。如果你说BARD是聊天GPT-4的80％，那么我告诉你一个消息。它可能只占聊天GPT-5的50％或20％。
Who knows what the product roadmap is inside of open AI? I am sure that they've got 200 ideas for things they could do to make it better and lowing fruit. Regardless, I think the pace of innovation here in development is going to speed up massively. I mean, there is going to be a flurry of activity. I agree. It's hard to know exactly how it's going to play out. But I think this idea that it's a foregone conclusion to these big companies are just going to catch up with open AI. I think that there's a strong counter argument. That's not the case.
谁知道OpenAI里的产品路线图是什么？我确信他们有200个想法可以做出更好的东西，摘取低垂的果实。不过，我认为开发中的创新步伐会大大加快。我的意思是，将会有大量的活动。我同意。很难准确知道它会如何发挥作用。但是我认为这个想法，即这些大公司只是会越来越赶上OpenAI，已经是板上钉钉的事实，这个想法有一个很强的反对论点。情况并非如此。
I'm making a very specific argument. It's not a foregone conclusion where all the value will get captured. Just like in any of these major tidal waves, if you make the bets too early, you typically don't make all the money. It tends to be the case. It has been in the past, at least, with these transformative moves. It's in the early third of the cycle is where the real opportunities to make the tons of money emerge. There's a lot of folks that show you a path and then just don't necessarily capture the value.
我在提出一个非常具体的观点。并不是所有的价值都会被捕获，这并非是板上钉钉的结论。就像在任何一次重大的潮水之中一样，如果你太早下注，那么通常你不会赚到所有的钱。这种情况在过去至少发生过，在这些变革性的变化中都是如此。在这个周期的前三分之一，才是真正赚钱的机会。有许多人会向你展示路径，但不一定能捕捉到其中的价值。
I'm not saying that that's going to be the case here. All I'm saying is if history is a guide, all of these other big waves have shown that fact patterned.
我不是说这里一定会发生这种情况。我想说的是，如果以往的经验是一个指导，所有这些其他大浪潮都显示了这种事实模式。
I'm very excited and I'm paying attention, but I'm just being circumspect with this idea that having been in the middle of these couple of waves before it, I made all the money by waiting a couple of years. I don't know if that's going to be true this time around, but that's sort of my posture right now.
我很兴奋，也在认真关注，但对于这个想法我还是保持谨慎态度。之前我曾经历过几次浪潮，但是最后等待了几年才赚到了钱。我不确定这次是否也会如此，但现在我的态度就是这样。
You obviously have a point because we're only four months since, how can we know where this is going to be in five years? You could be right.
你显然有道理，因为只有四个月过去了，我们怎么知道五年后会发生什么呢？你说得对。
To your point, SACS, I think it's clear, and this is big ups to the open AI team, that they will be one of the top two or three players. Absolutely. That, which is extraordinary in itself.
就你的观点来说，SACS，我认为很明显，这要归功于 Open AI 团队，他们将成为顶尖的两三名之一。绝对是不同寻常的。
The top four players, Freeberg, are obviously going to be Microsoft Open AI. We'll call that whatever, that little pairing. Then Google, Facebook, and then we haven't talked about Apple, but obviously Apple is not going to take this sitting down. Hopefully, they'll get in gear and have Siri make it to the next level or they'll just put her out to pasture.
前四名选手，弗里伯格，显然将会是微软的OpenAI。我们称之为什么，那个小组合。然后是谷歌，Facebook，然后我们还没有谈论过苹果，但显然苹果不会就此坐视不理。希望他们能够振作起来，让Siri升至下一个级别，或者他们只是让她随风而去。
If you were to look at those four and we're sitting here a year from now, who has the best product offering, who has the biggest user base? Just take a minute to think about that because you were at Google and we all know the word on the street is it's the return of the kings.
如果你现在看这四个公司，明年的今天我们再坐在这里，哪个公司的产品最好，哪个公司的用户群最庞大？请花一分钟想一想，因为你曾在谷歌工作，我们都知道市场流言谷歌将重获至尊宝座。
Larry and Sergey are super engaged by all reports. Every back channel, everybody I talked to is saying that they're every day, they're obsessed with Google's legacy now and making this happen. What can you tell us in terms of who you think a year or two from now will have the biggest user base and be the most innovative amongst that quartet or maybe you think there's other players who will emerge.
据所有报道称，拉里和谢尔盖都非常投入。每个后台渠道，我所说的每个人都说他们每天都在致力于谷歌的遗产，让这一切成为现实。你能告诉我们，你认为在一年或两年后，那四个中谁会拥有最大的用户基础并且最具创新性，或者你认为还有其他的竞争对手会崛起吗？
The advantage that Open AI has, which is the advantage that any call it emerging, you know, advantage competitor has is, yeah, outsider is that the incumbents are handicapped by their current scale. Much of the considerations set that Google has had in deciding what features and tools to launch with respect to AI over the last couple of years has been driven fundamentally by a concern about public policy and public reaction.
Open AI有的优势，也是任何被称为新兴优势竞争者的优势，是，外部人的优势在于现有规模限制了现有企业。在过去几年中，谷歌在决定推出人工智能方面的哪些功能和工具时所考虑的许多问题都基本上是出于对公共政策和公众反应的关注。
I know this from speaking to folks there that are close enough to kind of indicate like Google has been so targeted has been such the point of attack by governments around the world with respect to their scale and monopolegated and monopolistic kind of behavior as some people have framed it privacy concerns, et cetera, et cetera, the fines and the EU are extraordinary that so much of what goes on at Google today is can I get approval to do this?
我从那里与亲近Google的人们交谈，得知这些信息。世界各国政府一直在针对Google，因为它的规模和垄断性行为是一些人将其框定为隐私问题等等。欧盟的罚款非常严厉，因此如今Google所做的很多事情都需要得到批准。
And so many people have felt so frustrated that they can't actually unleash the toolkit that Google has built. And so they've been harnessed and focused on these internal capabilities. I think I mentioned this in the past, but things like what's the right video to show on YouTube to keep people engaged?
所以很多人感到非常沮丧，因为他们实际上无法发挥谷歌所构建的工具包。因此，他们被驾驭并专注于这些内部能力上。我想我之前提过，比如说如何选择适合的视频在YouTube上展示，让人们保持参与感？
What's the right ad to show to increase click through rates, et cetera, et cetera, versus building great consumer products for fear of the backlash that would arise and governments coming down on them. And ultimately attacking the revenue and the core revenue stream.
用中文说话，讲讲该如何展示合适的广告来提高点击率等等，与为了避免遭受政府打压和反弹而建造优秀的消费产品之间的权衡。最终目的是保护收入和核心收入渠道。
And this is no different than any other kind of innovators dilemma. You know, any other business of scale and any other industry historically ultimately gets disrupted because their job at that point is to protect their cash flow and their revenue stream and their balance and assets not to disrupt themselves, especially as a public company, especially under the scrutiny and the watchful eye of governments and regulators.
这跟其他创新者面临的困境没有什么不同。你知道的，任何一个规模较大的企业、任何一个历史上的行业，最终都会被打破，因为他们此时的工作是保护他们的现金流、收入来源，以及资产负债表，而不是自己打破。特别是作为一家上市公司，特别是在政府和监管机构的关注和监视下。
So I think Google has an aggregate probably good competitive talent, if not better talent than open AI and others. Google has arguably the best corpus of data upon which to pray and the best capabilities, the best toolkit, the best hardware. The lowest cost for running these sorts of models, the lowest cost for serving them, et cetera, et cetera.
所以我觉得 Google 拥有一支能够竞争的优秀团队，如果不是比 OpenAI 和其他团队更优秀的话。Google 拥有无疑是最好的数据语料库及最好的能力、工具包和硬件。运行这些型号的成本最低，为他们提供服务的成本最低等等。
So frankly, they're way behind. The battle is there is to lose if they are willing to disrupt themselves. And this is the moment that Larry and Sergey should wield those founders shares that they have. And they should wield the comments that they wrote in that founders letter that they will always make the right decision for the long term for this company, even if it means taking a cost in the short term and disrupting themselves.
实话说，他们跟不上步伐。如果他们愿意打破现有格局，那就会失败。这是拉里和谢尔盖应该发挥创始人股份的时刻。他们应该引用创始人信中写的评论，即使这意味着短期内要付出代价和打破自己的规矩，也要为公司的长远发展做出正确的决策。
This is the moment to prove that those founders shares were worth, you know, the negotiation to get there. And I think that it is going to require a real degree of scrutiny, a real degree of regulatory uncertainty, a real degree of challenge by governments and public policy people and perhaps even a revenue hit in the near term to realize the opportunity. But I do think that they're better equipped to win if they chose to.
这是证明那些创始人的股份值得为之谈判的时候。我认为这将需要真正的审查，真正的监管不确定性，政府和公共政策人员的真正挑战，甚至可能会在短期内影响收入，以实现机会。但是我认为他们如果选择这样做，就能更好地获胜。
Well said. Well really well said. I think the founder share insight is particularly interesting, Sachs, the fact that they fall for those. It did nothing with them. Gotcha. Yeah. No, I was just going to say the exact same thing. It's like if they don't use it now, what would it take and when?
说得好，真的说得很好。我觉得创始人分享的洞见特别有趣，Sachs，他们为那些东西付出了代价。我明白了。是的。不，我刚想说完全一样的话。就好像如果他们现在不使用它，那需要什么和何时才能使用？
Yeah. And it's just yet another yet another case of the emperor has no clothes, just a power grab by Silicon Valley execs, which was meaningless because if in this moment, you don't wield that power and break that company into bits as you need to, what was the point of having it? And then, and say we're going to give barred results to 10% of users and ask them to get feedback on it because who has more squarries than just one point I want to make there for Riverberg.
是的。这只是又一个皇帝没有衣服的例子，只是硅谷高管的权力抓取，这毫无意义，因为如果你现在不行使那种权力，并且像你需要的那样将公司分解成片，那还有什么意义呢？然后，我们说，我们将向10％的用户提供被禁止的结果，并要求他们提供反馈，因为谁比Riverberg更有方块呢？ 我想在那里提出一个观点。
Yeah. Who has more reinforcement learning than Google? That's search box is everywhere and people write question after question and Gmail and Google docs, etc. I mean, they have so many people asking questions and YouTube might be the transcripts of every video and the image of every video bananas and the comments under it. You know the comments under the video. You have the transcript of what happened in this video and then what was the question and answer underneath it?
是啊，谁比 Google 更擅长强化学习呢？他们的搜索框无处不在，人们不停地写问题，而且还有 Gmail 和 Google 文档等等。我的意思是，他们有很多人在提问，而 YouTube 可能是每个视频的转录和每个视频香蕉的图片以及评论下面的内容。你知道视频下面的评论吧。你有这个视频中发生的事情的转录，然后下面是什么问题和答案？
Let me make the counterpoint. Please. To my own point, like look at how Gerstner came after Zuck. So Zuck had his point of view, his strongly held belief that AR VR was the future of the platform. That's what he wanted to bet into. That's what he wanted to lean into. It's what he wanted to build the company against. He did it and then the financial analysts and the investors came at him and said, this is a waste of money, focus on making money. You have a responsibility to shareholders.
请让我提出另一种观点。比如，看看Gerstner是如何接替Zuck的。Zuck有他自己的观点，他坚信AR VR是平台的未来。这是他想要打赌的东西，也是他想要发挥的优势。他想通过这个来建立公司。但是，金融分析师和投资者却批评他，说这是浪费钱的，应该集中精力赚钱。他们认为他有对股东的责任。
F those founder shares, you don't deserve that 10x voting right or whatever the framing might have been to get him to say, you know what, I acquiesce, I'm giving it up. And I think that we should also think about what's going to happen on the other side. Google is a trillion plus dollar market cap company. Their shares are owned by every public endowment, public pension fund, institutional investor owns Google in their portfolio.
如果那些创始人股份不应该拥有10倍的投票权或者任何其他他们策略上的优势的话，你就没必要给予他们那样的待遇，让他们认为你默认他们了。而且我认为，我们也应该考虑一下另一方面的情况。谷歌是一家市值超过一万亿美元的公司。每一个公共基金、公共养老基金、机构投资者都会在他们的投资组合中持有谷歌的股份。
So the backlash against Google making a hard bet like this and potentially destroying billions of dollars of cash flow in the process every year will not be easy to do. That the same sorts of letters that Gerstner at all, and obviously we love Gerstner, and we can all defend him all day long. At Zuck is what might may end up happening with Alphabet if they did choose to go this path. Saks, what do you think here about the founder shares specifically in Google's chances of disrupting themselves and, you know, just putting this into every product and shoving it down users' throats and catching up?
因此，对于谷歌做出如此冒险的押注并有可能每年摧毁数十亿美元的现金流，所引起的反弹不会很容易化解。这是指Gerstner等人也面临的同类问题，我们显然喜爱Gerstner，可以一整天为他辩护。如果Alphabet选择这条路，情况可能会像Zuck一样。Saks，请问您认为创始人股份对于谷歌的自我毁灭和将其纳入每一款产品并强迫用户使用的机会有何影响？
Well, I mean, with all due respect, Larry and Sergey, I mean, they've been on the beach a long time. This reminds me of Apollo Creed coming out of retirement in rocket four. Little out of shape. Little out of shape. A lot of fans say, but they could be a little out of shape. I mean, it may not look like Ivan Drago, but this is one-shroud character.
嗯，我的意思是，恕我直言，Larry和Sergey，他们在沙滩上待了好久。这让我想起了阿波罗·克里德在第四部火箭中复出的情况。有点失去了状态。有很多粉丝说，但他们可能有点失去了状态。我的意思是，它可能看起来不像伊万·德拉戈，但这是一个非常厉害的角色。
This is one-shroud character. I mean, Altman is fit. He's fit. He's been in the arena. Yeah, he's a multi-time founder who sat at the top of YC and got to see everything that worked and got to see all the research. And he's been plugging away at this for, like, the years. So there's a big, I just think there's a big catch-up on.
这是一个很棒的人物，我是说，Altman很有资质。他很出色。他已经在竞技场上做了很多年了。是的，他是一位多次创业者，曾经坐在YCombinator的最高领导层，亲眼见证了所有成功的案例及其所做的研究。而且他已经在这个领域苦苦钻研了好几年了。所以我认为还有很大的进步空间。
Now, the Google has all the resources in the world, and they've got a lot of proprietary assets too, and they've got all the incentive in the world. So do I think that Google will be one of the top four players in AI? Absolutely.
现在，谷歌拥有全球范围内的所有资源，也拥有许多专有资产，此外他们也有全球最大的激励。那么，我认为谷歌是否会成为人工智能领域的四大巨头之一？毫无疑问，会的。
But this idea is going to come in steamroll open AI. I have a prediction. I got a prediction. Within next year, Larry and Sergey take the title of Co-CEOs, and then they do a demo day where the two of them get on stage. And they actually do the demo to be processed. It just happens. That's fictional. It's a notification. That's it.
这个想法将会推动AI全面发展。我有一个预测。我预测，在接下来的一年内，Larry和Sergey将成为联合首席执行官，然后他们会举办一个演示日，一起上台进行演示。他们会真正地展示被处理的演示内容。这只是虚构的，是一种通知。就是这样。
Listen, and Bayes also go around for president. Those are my two predictions. I'm taking a lot of predictions. Can you imagine if Larry, Free Brook, where are the chances of Larry and Sergey taking Co-CEO slots? That's prediction one. And then prediction two. Where are the chances of them running the next Google IO where they get on stage, and they walk people through all the products that they shepherded, and that they have invested interested in that they want to demo.
听着，贝叶斯也要竞选总统。这是我两个预测中的其中一个。我有很多预测。你能想象如果拉里和弗里布鲁克有机会成为合作CEO吗？这是第一个预测。然后第二个预测是，他们将主持下一个Google IO，向人们介绍他们推动的所有产品，以及他们投资感兴趣的并想展示的产品。
There is an institutional problem at Google at the top level, which does need to be solved, which is this position of constantly being in defense against the scrutiny of regulators and public policy folks and all these different groups that are against Google. And so as a result, the kind of cultural seasoning, particularly at the executive and the board level, has been one of like, protect the nest, don't overreach, don't overstep. And it's a real, I think one for the business schoolbook, so whatever, ultimately is what they end up doing about it.
谷歌在高层存在一个制度性问题，需要解决，即不断面对监管机构、公共政策人士和所有反对谷歌的不同群体的审查。因此，特别是在高管和董事会层面上，这种文化上的熏陶一直是“保护巢穴，不过度行动”。这确实是一个商学院的实例，无论最终他们做出了什么样的决定。
Because now is the time when that defensive posture is really kind of putting up the entire business at risk. The same thing happened to Microsoft, remember, in the late 90s when they got crushed by that antitrust lawsuit. It made them very defensive. Well, that can go, but that consentically, they had a wartime CEO come in. Balmer came in and followed by kind of an innovative guy who could kind of continue to build. And I think that there may be a moment here.
因为现在是那种防御性立场会使整个企业处于风险之中的时候。要记住，在90年代末微软也遇到过同样的问题，受到反垄断诉讼的困扰，导致他们非常防御性。不过，这可能是一个机会，他们可以像微软一样找一个有战时CEO的人来管理，接着找一个能够持续创新和发展的人来接力。
Look, I love Sundar. He's a great guy, great CEO. Sundar and I don't know if I got five or told you this. He and I started at Google on the same day. We're both in the same new global class. We were the freaking hat on the TGIF day and on stage. He was a product manager and now he runs the company. But I think the question is like, whether it's the CEO or the broader whole kind of executive org or the board, a degree of disruption necessary to shift that cultural seasoning is so necessary right now for them to have a shot at this.
听着，我喜欢桑达尔。他是个伟大的人，出色的CEO。桑达尔和我不确定我是否告诉过你这件事。他和我在谷歌的第一天开始工作。我们都在同一个新的全球班级里。我们是TGIF日和舞台上的疯狂的帽子。他曾经是一个产品经理，现在他经营这家公司。但我想问题是，无论是CEO还是更广泛的高管组织或董事会，现在需要一定程度的干扰来转移文化调味料，这对他们有机会是如此必要。
And similar to what you just said, Zach, you're going to need a bomber type moment to kind of reinvigorate that business. And by the way, I'll tell you. I'll talk to you in a moment, I think. I'll talk to you in a moment. Well, yeah, because it's an important point when bomber took over during that period after Gates, when they were on their heels, he basically just focused on revenue and paying dividends and stock buybacks and the stock went sideways and he missed mobile. And now it's missing. You're forgetting one big thing, which is that that was also because he had to operate under a consent decree to the DOJ.
和你刚才说的一样，扎克，你需要一个轰炸机式的时刻来重新激活那个企业。顺便说一下，我会在一会儿和你谈谈，我想。我马上和你讲。嗯，因为在盖茨之后，那段期间Bomber接管了，并且他们处于被动的状态，他只专注于收入和支付股息以及回购股票，股票价格保持不变，他忽略了移动业务。现在又一次错过了。你忘了一个重要的事情，那就是他必须在美国司法部同意书下运营。
Exactly. So the product managers of Microsoft were replaced with low hairs from the Department of Justice and you had to get their sign off before you could chip anything. So we have to remember that those things probably slowed Microsoft down as well. And the great thing that Satya had was a blank slate and the removal of that consent decree. So he was able to do everything that just made a lot of sense and he's executed flawlessly.
所以，微软的产品经理被来自司法部的低层人员取代，你必须得到他们的签字才能授权任何事情。因此，我们必须记住这些事情可能也会减缓微软的速度。萨蒂亚拥有一块空白的板子和废止了那项同意法令，这是伟大的事情。因此，他能够做出所有有意义的事情，并且他表现得无瑕疵。
I think the problem at Google is not Sundar or Larry or Sergey. I think it's more in the deep bowels of middle management of that company, which is that there's just far too many people that probably have an opinion and their opinion is not shrouded in survival. Their opinion is shrouded in elite language around what is the moral and ethical implications of this and where has it's been properly tested on the diaspora of 19 different ethnic tribes of the Amazon.
我认为 Google 的问题并不在于 Sundar、Larry 或 Sergey。我认为问题更深层次地出现在公司的中层管理层，因为那里有太多人可能有自己的观点，而这些观点并不是出于生存的考虑。他们的观点是用精英的语言来掩盖这样的问题，例如这件事在道德和伦理方面的影响以及它是否在亚马逊生活着的19个不同民族的人中得到了适当的测试。
That's the kind of decision making that is a nice to have when you are the second or third most valuable technology company in the world. But you have to be able to pause that kind of thinking and instead get into wartime survival mode and it's very hard. So it doesn't almost matter at this point what Sundar wants. The real question is what is the capability of middle management to either do it or get out of the way.
这是一种当你成为世界上第二或第三大最有价值的科技公司时才有的决策方式。但你必须能够暂停这种思考，转而进入战时求生模式，这很困难。因此，现在几乎不重要Sundar想要什么。真正的问题是中层管理层有没有能力去实现并推进这种思维方式。
And I think that in all of these big companies that struggle what you really see is an inability for middle management to get out of the way or frankly just you need somebody to then fire them. And if you look at folks who get their groove back, let's see what Facebook does. What are they targeting their targeting middle management? If you look at what Elon does in the companies that he owns, there is virtually no middle management. It's like get out of the way. Build product build product and ship it. Yeah. And what is the core truth?
我觉得所有这些大公司都有一个问题，那就是中层管理层无法撤退，或者说你需要有人把他们开掉。如果你看看那些重新找回状态的人，比如Facebook，他们的目标是什么？他们瞄准的是中层管理层。如果你看看埃隆所拥有的公司，那里几乎没有中层管理层。就好像说：离开我的路。建立产品，然后交付。是啊，这就是核心真理。
And so if failure is there in front of you and if David is right that you have 200 million users come out of nowhere who are voting every day with their time and attention to use an app and that doesn't create a fiber long fire where you get middle management out of the way and you are the senior most people talking to the people doing the work and shipping things every day. You are toast. You are toast.
如果你面前有失败的困境，且David说得没错——你有2亿快速增长的用户，每天都在用这个应用投票，表达他们的时间和关注，但这不能激起所有人的激情，消除中层管理障碍，让资深人士与具体的操作人员交流、每天完成任务。那你就将一败涂地。
A lot of people are starting to think we're moving a little bit too fast when it comes to open AI's incredible performance which had GPT-4, the plugins and all this. And so the future of life institute which was formed in 2015, it's a nonprofit that's focused on de-risking major technology like AI. They did a petition titled Pause Giant AI Experiments and Open Letter, a bunch of computer scientists signed this letter.
很多人开始认为我们在开放AI的表现方面走得太快了，包括GPT-4、插件等等。因此，未来生命研究所成立于2015年，是一个专注于降低AI等重大技术风险的非营利组织。他们发起了一份名为“暂停巨型AI实验和公开信”的请愿书，许多计算机科学家签署了这封信。
And the letter quote says we must ask ourselves should we let machines flood our information channels with propaganda and untruth should we automate away all the jobs including the fulfilling ones should we develop non-human minds that might eventually outnumber at smart obsolete and replace us should we risk loss of control of our civilization. A number of notable tech leaders like Elon Steve Wozniak and a handful of deep-mind researchers have signed it. What do you guys think of the letter? Are we going to slow down or not?
这封信中说到了一个问题，我们应该问自己：我们是否应该让机器用宣传和虚假信息来淹没我们的信息渠道？我们是否应该让所有工作都被自动化取代，包括那些有意义的工作？我们是否应该开发出不需要人类的智能，最终会比我们更聪明并取代我们？我们是否应该冒着失去文明控制的风险？许多知名的科技领袖，如伊隆·马斯克、史蒂夫·沃兹尼亚克和一些深度学习研究人员都签了字。大家对这封信有什么看法？我们会放慢速度还是继续加速发展呢？
Then we could ask the question generally how close are we getting to AGI which is what everybody is scared of is that these agents start working with each other in the background to do things that are against human interest. I know it sounds like science fiction but there is a very that when these AIs start operating on their own like we explained in the previous sort of segment here with plugins and they make agents that are operating based on feedback from each other. Should they get out of control and be mischievous and then work against human interest.
然后我们可以通常地问一个问题，我们离AGI有多近，这是每个人都害怕的，即这些代理开始在背景下合作做一些违背人类利益的事情。我知道这听起来像是科幻小说，但这真的是有可能的，当这些人工智能开始像我们之前在这里解释的那样独立运行，并使用插件创建彼此基于反馈运作的代理时。如果它们失控并且变得调皮，然后开始反对人类的利益，这是非常危险的。
So what do you think sex? I think there's a difference between what could happen in the short term and then what could happen in the long term. I think in the short term everything we're seeing right now is very positive and let me just give you an example. There was a really interesting tweet storm about a guy who wrote about how Chad Gpt saved his dog. Did you guys see this? This is one of the really mind blowing ones to me use cases.
那么，你觉得性是什么样的？我认为短期和长期可能发生的事情是有区别的。我认为短期内，我们现在所看到的一切都非常积极。让我举个例子。有个人发了很有趣的推文，讲述了一只狗被 Chad Gpt 救了的故事。你们看到了吗？我觉得这是一个非常令人惊叹的使用案例。
So his dog was sick, took him to a vet, vet prescribed some medication three days later, dog still sick and fact even worse. So the owner of the pet just literally copied and pasted the lab result for the blood test for the dog with all the lab values into Chad Gpt and said what could this be? Like what's your likely diagnosis? Chad Gpt gave three possible answers, three illnesses.
所以他的狗生病了，带它去看了兽医，兽医开了些药，三天后狗狗还是生病了，并且状况变得更糟了。所以这位宠物主人直接将狗狗的血液检测结果中的所有实验室指标复制并粘贴到Chad Gpt里，问这可能是什么？比如你的可能诊断是什么？Chad Gpt给出了三个可能的答案，也就是三种疾病。
The first one was with the vet basically a diagnosed with so that wasn't it. The second one was excluded by another test. So he then went to a second vet and said listen, I think my dog has the third one and vet prescribed something and sure enough dog is cured saved. So that's really mind blowing that even though Chad Gpt has been specifically optimized as far as we know for lab results, it could figure this out.
第一次就医时，兽医基本上诊断出了问题，所以不是那个。第二次则被另一项检测所排除。所以他去了第二家兽医，并说：“听着，我觉得我的狗得上了第三种病”，兽医随后开了个处方，结果狗狗被治愈了，保住了它的生命。这真是令人惊叹，即使我们知道“查德Gpt”已经被特别优化以用于实验室结果，它也能找到正确的答案。
The reason I'm mentioning this is it gives you a sense of the potential here to cure disease, you know, like I could see major medical breakthroughs based on the AI in the next five or 10 years. Now the question is like what happens in the long term, you know, as the AI gets smarter and smarter and we are kind of getting into the role of science fiction, but here would be the scenario is you're on Chad Gpt 10 or 20 or whatever it is or maybe some other company's AI.
我提到这个原因是因为它让人们感受到治愈疾病的潜力，我能看到未来5到10年中，基于人工智能的重大医学突破。现在的问题是，随着人工智能越来越聪明，我们会进入科幻的领域，但是这里的情境是，您正在使用Chad Gpt 10或20，或者可能是其他某些公司的人工智能。
And the developers asked the AI, how could you make yourself better? How do it, which is a question we ask Chad Gpt all the time in different contexts. And so Chad Gpt will already have the ability to write perfect code by that point. I think, you know, code writing is one of the, I think of it superpowers already. So it gives itself the ability to rewrite its code to auto update it to recursively make itself better. I mean, at that point, isn't that like a speciation event? Doesn't that very quickly lead to the singularity if the AI has the capability to rewrite its own code to make itself better? And you know, won't it very quickly write billions of versions of itself? And you know, it's very hard to predict what that future looks like.
开发人员问了AI一个问题：你如何让自己变得更好？这就像我们在不同情境下总是问Chad Gpt的问题一样。而到了那个时候，Chad Gpt将已经具备编写完美代码的能力。我想，你知道的，编写代码已经是一种超能力了。因此，它给自己提供了重写代码、自动更新并递归地让自己变得更好的能力。我是说，在那个时候，那不是一个物种分化事件吗？如果AI有重写自己代码、让自己变得更好的能力，那不会很快导致奇点吗？你知道的，它会很快地编写数十亿个版本吗？而且，很难预测未来会是什么样子。
Now, I also don't know how far away we are from that. That could be 10 years, 20 years, 30 years, whatever. But I think it's a question worth asking for sure.
现在，我也不知道我们离那个目标还有多远。这可能需要10年，20年，30年，或更长时间。但我认为这是值得问一下的问题。
Is it worth slowing down though, Sacks? Should we be pausing because based on what you said, I think you framed it properly. When these things hit a certain point and they start reinforcing their own learning with each other, they can go at infinite speed, right?
萨克斯，减速值得吗？根据您所说的，我认为您描述得很好，我们应该暂停一下吗？当这些事情达到一定程度，开始相互加强学习，它们就可以以无限的速度进行，对吗？
This is not comparable to human speed. They could be firing off millions, billions of different scenarios. We're definitely now on this fuck around find out curve. Yeah. And so there is only one way to really find out, which is somebody's going to push the boundaries.
这不可以和人类的速度相提并论。他们可以发射数以百万计、数以十亿计的不同情境。我们现在肯定处于“胡搞找死”曲线上。是的，只有一种真正的方法来找出答案，就是有人要推动界限。
Competitive dynamics will get the better of some startup. They'll do something that people will look back on and say, whoa, that was a bridge too far. So yeah, we're just a matter of time.
竞争环境将不利于一些初创企业。他们会做些事情，人们回头看会说，哇，那是冒险过头了。所以，我们只是时间问题。
Yeah, I think we're not going to slow down. I actually think it's going the other way. I think things are going to speed up. And the reason they're going to speed up is because the one thing Silicon Valley is really good at is taking advantage of a platform shift.
是的，我认为我们不会减速。实际上，我认为情况正相反，事情会变得更快。他们会变得更快是因为硅谷真正擅长的一件事就是利用技术平台的变革。
And so when you think about all the VCs and all the founders, everyone accuses us of being lemmings. And so when there's a fake platform shift for people kind of glomons, something that ends up not being real, everyone's got egg on their faces.
所以，当你考虑到所有的风险投资家和创始人时，他们都指责我们是旅鼠。所以，当有假的平台转移出现时，人们很容易犯错，最终这一切都变得不够真实，每个人都会蒙羞。
But the flip side of that is that when the platform shift is real, Silicon Valley is really good at throwing money at it. The talent knows how to go after it. And they keep making it better and better.
但反过来，当平台转移真实存在时，硅谷非常擅长向其投入资金。人才知道如何追逐它。他们不断地让它变得更好。
And so that's the dynamic we're in right now. If you look at 70% of the last YC class was ready, all AI startups, sure, the next one will probably be 95%.
所以，这就是我们现在所处的动态。如果你看一看上一届 YC 学员的 70% 都是准备好了的，全都是 AI 初创企业，那么下一届可能会有 95%。
So I think that we're on a path here where the pace of innovation is actually going to speed up. Companies are going to compete with each other. They're going to seek to invent new capabilities. And I think the results are going to all be incredibly positive for some period of time.
我认为我们正在朝着创新速度会加快的道路上前进。公司们将会相互竞争，并试图发明出新的能力。我相信，这将在一段时间内带来极为积极的结果。
Like the vet example, we're going to cure illnesses. We're going to solve major problems. They're positive. Invest more. We trust more.
就像兽医的例子一样，我们要治愈疾病。我们要解决主要问题。这是积极的。多投资一些。我们更信任。
But the paradox of that is, Chamath is pointing out, freeberg, is if we trust it more, we invest more than some person in a free market is going to say, you know what? I need to be chat GPT. Therefore, I'm going to take the rails off this thing. I'm going to let it go faster and take off some constraints because I need to win. And I'm so far behind.
但其中的悖论是，Chamath 指出，如果我们更加信任它，那么我们会比一个自由市场中的某个人投资更多。你知道吗？我需要成为 chat GPT，所以我要拆卸这个装置，并让它更快、更无拘束地运行，因为我需要赢，而我已经落后了很多。
How do you feel about that scenario that sort of Chamath and Saks teed up, freeberg? I think there's like GPT-3, I think, ran on 700 gigs. Is that right?
你对那个由Sort of Chamath和Saks提出的情景感觉如何，Freeberg？我认为GPT-3要用到700吉的空间，我没记错吧？
Does anyone know what GPT-4 runs on? It's got to be on some number that's not too, not many multiples of that. But look, someone could make a copy of this thing and fork it and develop an entirely new model.
有没有人知道GPT-4运行在什么上面？它一定是在一些不太多的倍数上运行。但是看，有人可以复制它并分叉它，开发出一个全新的模型。
I think that's what's incredible about software and digital technology and also kind of, you know, means that it's very hard to contain. Similar to what we've seen in biology, ever since biology got digitized through DNA sequencing and the ability to kind of express molecules through gene editing, you know, you can't control or contain the ability to do gene editing work at all because everyone knows the code,
我认为这就是软件和数字技术的不可思议之处，同时也意味着它很难被限制。就像生物学被数字化通过DNA测序和通过基因编辑表达分子后所看到的一样，你知道的，你无法控制或限制基因编辑工作的能力，因为每个人都知道这个代码。
everyone can make CRISPR-Cas molecules, everyone can make gene editing systems in any lab anywhere. Once it was out, it was out. And now there's hundreds of variants for doing gene editing, many of which are much improved over CRISPR-Cas9.
每个人都可以制造CRISPR-Cas分子，每个人都可以在任何实验室制作基因编辑系统。一旦它被发布出来，就无法阻止了。现在有数百个不同的基因编辑变体，其中许多比CRISPR-Cas9更为改进。
I use that as an analogy because it was the breakthrough technology that allowed us to precisely specifically edit genomes and that allowed us to engine your biology and do these incredible things where biology effectively became software.
我把这个作为类比，因为这项突破技术使我们能够精确具体地编辑基因组，从而可以引擎你的生物学，做出这些令人难以置信的事情，使生物学有效地成为软件。
Remember, CRISPR-Cas9 gave us effectively a word processing type tool, find and replace. And the tooling that's evolved from that is much better. So whatever is underlying, whatever the parameters are for GPT-4, if a close enough replicant of that model exists or a copy of that model is made and then new training data and new evolutions can be done separately, you could see many, many variants that kind of emerge from here.
记住，CRISPR-Cas9 工具给了我们一个很有效的文字处理工具，就像在 Word 中的查找和替换功能一样。而且从这个工具中演变出来的工具会更好。因此，不管 GPT-4 的基础是什么，不管参数如何设置，只要能够存在一个足够接近的该模型的复制品，或者该模型的副本被制作出来，并独立进行新的训练数据和新的演变，那么就可以看到许多许多种类的变体从这里出现。
And I think this is a good echoing of Chimoff's point. We don't know what's ultimately going to win. Is there enough of a network effect in the plugin model that Sachs pointed out to really give open AI the sustaining competitive advantage? I'm not sure.
我认为这很能呼应Chimoff的观点。我们不知道最终哪个方案会胜出。Sachs指出的插件模型是否有足够的网络效应，真的能让开放AI获得持久的竞争优势吗？我不确定。
The model runs on 700 gigs. That's less data than fits on my iPhone. So I could take that model, I could take the parameters of that model, and I could create an entirely new version, I could fork it, and I could do something entirely new with it.
这个模型只需要运行 700 吉字节的数据，比我的 iPhone 可以装的数据还少。因此，我可以接手这个模型和它的参数，然后创造一个全新的版本或者基于它做出一些其他的全新改进。
So I don't think you can contain it. I don't think that this idea that we can put in place some regulatory constraints and say it's illegal to do this or try and create IP around it or protections around it is realistic at this state.
我觉得你无法控制它。我认为现在在这个阶段，我们想要设立一些规管限制，或者说将其定为非法，或者试图对其进行知识产权保护或保护措施，这种想法是不现实的。
The power of the tool is so extraordinary, the extendability of the tools are so extraordinary. So the economic and the various incentives are there for other models to emerge and whether they're directly copied from someone hacking into open AI servers and making a copy of that model or whether they're open source or whether someone generates something that's 95% is good and then it's forks in a whole new class of models emerge.
这个工具的能力非常非凡，工具的可扩展性也非常非凡。因此，经济和各种激励措施都存在，其他模型就可以出现，无论是直接从黑客攻入开放的AI服务器并复制那个模型，还是开源的，还是有人生成了95%的好东西，然后就形成了全新的一类模型。
I think this is like, as Sachs pointed out, highlighting the kind of economic market uprooting, social uprooting potential and many models will start to kind of come to market. What do we think the impact of Y-Color jobs getting annihilated by this technology if that in fact comes to pass?
我认为这就像萨克斯指出的那样，突出了经济市场颠覆、社会颠覆的潜力，很多模式将开始涌现在市场上。如果技术确实如此，在Y-Color行业案的情况下，我们认为这将带来什么影响呢？
I want to say one thing on this. Yeah, look, let me just share one example here. So here's a Reddit post that I was made aware of earlier this week. I lost everything that made me love my job through mid-journey overnight.
我想说一件事。是这样的，让我举一个例子。这是一个Reddit的帖子，我在本周早些时候被告知。我在中途一夜之间失去了所有让我爱我的工作的东西。
I am employed as a 3D artist in a small games company of 10 people. Our team is two people who basically explains. He says since mid-journey version five came out, he's not an artist anymore, nor a 3D artist. All they do is prompting, photoshopping and implementing good looking pictures. And he basically says this happened overnight and he had no choice. Boss also had no choice. He says, I am now able to create rig and animate a character that's spit out from MJ mid-journey in two to three days. Before it took us several weeks and 3D, the difference is that he cares about his job and for his boss it's just a huge time. Money saver.
我在一家只有10个人的小型游戏公司里担任3D艺术家。我们的团队只有两个人，基本上是解说员。他说自从中途版本五发布以来，他不再是一名艺术家，也不再是3D艺术家了。他们只是在提示，使用Photoshop和实现好看的图片。他基本上说这发生在一夜之间，他别无选择。老板也没有选择。他说，现在他能在两到三天内创造出从MJ中途版本中出来的角色的骨骼和动画。以前需要数周和3D，区别在于他关心他的工作，而对于老板来说只是一个巨大的时间和金钱节省。
He's no longer making art. And the person who was number two in the organization who didn't make us good content as him is now embracing this technology because it carries favor with his boss. He ends basically saying getting a job in the game industry is already hard, but leaving a company and a nice team because AI took my job, feels very dystopian. I doubt it would be better in a different company also. I am between grief and anger and I am sorry for using. My gosh. Your art fellow artist.
他不再制作艺术作品了。那个组织里排名第二的人并没有像他一样制作出好的内容，但他现在正在接受这项技术，因为这会讨好他的老板。他最后说，进入游戏行业已经很难了，但是因为 AI 代替我的工作而离开公司和一个好团队，感觉非常反乌托邦。我处于悲痛和愤怒之间，很抱歉我使用了这种语言。我的天啊，你的艺术家同行。
This is yet another reason that Figma really needs to close the acquisition from Adobe. I mean, let's like the value of these apps are just getting gutted. If you take a workflow management tool for things like design and imagery and you reduce it by an order of 90%, it's like what is that app experience worth? And how could you replicate it if you were a big company that already has distribution? That's one comment.
这句话的意思是Figma非常需要从Adobe手里收购，这是另一个原因。我是指，这些应用程序的价值正在被削弱。如果你把用于设计和图像等工作流管理工具的功能减少90％，那这个应用程序体验的价值还剩多少呢？如果你是一个已经有了分销的大公司，你如何复制这个应用程序体验呢？这是一条评论。
But what I would tell you Jason to answer the white collar question is I think there are a handful of companies you need to look at exclusively because they will be the first ones to really figure out how to displace human labor. And that is TCS, so Tata Consulting Services, Accenture, Cognizant. These are all the folks that do coding for higher work at scale.
我想告诉你Jason，回答白领问题，有一些公司你需要专门关注，因为它们将是最早真正找出如何替代人力的公司。那就是TCS，也就是塔塔咨询服务公司，安永，Cognizant。这些都是为高规模工作编码的人。
I think Accenture has something like 750,000 employees. So the incentive to sort of squeeze off backs to create better utilization rates to increase profitability is quite obvious. It always has been they will be the first people to figure out how to use these tools at scale. Before the law firms or the accounting firms or any of those folks even sort of try to figure out how to displace what color labor.
我认为埃森哲有大约75万名员工。因此，为了提高盈利能力，挤压员工以创造更好的利用率的动机非常明显。他们一直都是第一个想到如何才能规模化使用这些工具的人。在律师事务所、会计师事务所或任何其他人尝试弥补哪些劳动力的空缺之前，埃森哲已经在这方面率先尝试了。
I think it's going to be the coding jobs and it's going to be the coding for higher jobs that companies like Accenture and TCS. So those business processing do for other people, developer, kind of folks, they're going to need half as many people, 25% as many people. We're going to find out the efficient frontier. Yeah.
我觉得未来最需要的工作将是编程工作，尤其是像Accenture和TCS这样的公司需要的高级编程工作。那些为别人进行业务处理的人，以及开发人员等等，他们需要的人手将减少一半，甚至只需要原来的25%。我们将发现高效前沿。是的。
I see it a different way. I mean, this argument that productivity leads to job loss has been made for hundreds of years and it's always been refuted. When you make human beings more productive, it leads to more prosperity, more wealth, more growth. And so yeah, it's easy to think about in a narrow way that jobs are going to be displaced, but why would that be?
我有不同的看法。我的意思是，有人主张更高的生产率会导致失业已经持续了几百年，而且总是被证明是错的。当人类变得更加高效能时，它会带来更多的繁荣、财富和增长。所以，是的，在狭隘的角度来看，可能会认为会有失业问题，但这为什么会是这样呢？
It's because you're giving leverage to other human beings to get more done and some of those human beings, really anybody with a good idea is now going to be able to create a start up much more easily. So you're going to see a huge explosion in creativity, in-start creation, new companies, new jobs.
这是因为你给了其他人更多的机会去完成更多的事情，其中一些人，只要有好的想法，就能更容易地创建自己的创业公司。所以你将会看到创造力、创业、新公司和新就业机会的巨大爆炸。
Imagine, think about the case of Zuckerberg founding Facebook at Harvard. He wrote the first version himself, maybe with a couple of friends. That project happened and turned into a giant company because he was able to self-execute his idea without needing to raise venture capital or even recruit employees, even really before forming a company.
想像一下，扎克伯格在哈佛大学创建Facebook的情况。他自己写了第一个版本，也许还有几个朋友帮忙。这个项目之所以成功并发展成为一个巨大的公司，是因为他能够自己实现自己的想法，甚至在成立公司之前就不需要筹集风险投资或招募员工。
Anyone with a good idea is going to do that soon. You're going to be able to use these AI tools. They truly will be no code. You'll be able to create an app or a website just by speaking to some AI program in a natural language way.
有好点子的人很快就会这样做。你很快就能使用这些人工智能工具了。它们确实不需要编码。只需以自然语言的方式与某些人工智能程序对话，就能创建应用或网站。
So more flowers will bloom, more start up for a little more projects. Now, we'll create, I think, a lot of dislocation, but for every testimonial that is like the one that you showed, which I think is, I'd say, a little bit overly dramatic, I have seen 10 or 100 testimonials from coders on Twitter or other blogs talking about the power that these new tools give them.
所以更多的花朵将会开放，更多的项目将会启动。现在，我认为我们将会创造出很多不适应，但是对于每一个像你展示的那一个感言，我想说，这个可能有点过于夸张了，我已经在Twitter或其他博客上看到了10或100个编码者的感言，他们谈论到这些新工具给他们带来的力量。
They are like, this makes me a 10X engineer. Right. And especially these junior engineers who write out a school who don't have 20 years of coding history, they get superpowers right away. It makes them so much better.
他们说：“这让我成为了10倍工程师。”特别是那些不具备20年编程经验的在校初级工程师，他们一下子就获得了超能力。这让他们变得更好了很多。
So the proper response from this, but let me give you a response to that guy. So, and using Saxx's point, that guy is saying what used to take me weeks, I can't now do in two to three days. And I feel like my work is gone. And that's because he's thinking in terms of his output being static.
所以，根据这种情况的适当回应，让我来回应一下那个人。所以，使用Saxx的观点，那个人说以前需要几个星期才能完成的工作，现在只需要2到3天就可以完成。我感觉我的工作消失了。因为他考虑的是他的产出是静态的。
And if he thinks about his output being dynamic, he can now, in the matter of three weeks instead of making one character, he can now make a character every two days. So he can make 30 characters in three weeks. That's an alternative way for him to think about what this tooling does for him and his business.
如果他考虑到他的输出是动态的，现在三周的时间内，他可以每两天制作一个角色，而不是制作一个角色。因此，他可以在三周内制作30个角色。这是他考虑这种工具对他和他的业务所作的另一种方式。
The number of video games will go up by 10X or 100X or 1000X. The number of movies and videos that can be rendered in computers can go up by 10X or 100X or 1000X. This is why I really believe strongly that in some period of time, we will all have our own movie or our own video game ultimately generated for us on the fly based on our particular interests.
视频游戏的数量将增加10倍或100倍或1000倍。可以通过计算机渲染的电影和视频的数量也将增加10倍或100倍或1000倍。这就是为什么我非常坚信，在某个时期，我们将会根据我们特定的兴趣，生成我们自己的电影或视频游戏。
There will certainly be shared culture, shared themes, shared morality, shared things that tie all these things together. And that will become the shared experience. But in terms of us all consuming the same content, you would YouTube and TikTok, we're all consuming different stuff all the time. And this will enable an acceleration of that evolution and personalization.
肯定会有共同的文化、共同的主题、共同的道德，以及将这些事物联系在一起的共同之处。这将成为共同的体验。但就我们都消费相同的内容而言，像YouTube和TikTok这样的平台，我们始终在消费不同的东西。而这将促进这种演变和个性化的加速。
I'll also highlight, back in the day, one human had to farm a farm by hand. And we eventually got the tool of a hoe and we could put in the ground and make stuff faster. And then we got a plow. And then we got a tractor. And today, agricultural farm equipment allows one farmer to farm over 10,000 acres. You go to Western Australia. It's incredible. These guys have 24 row planters and harvesters and it's completely changed the game. So the unit of output per farmer is now literally millions of times what it was just 150 years ago.
我也想强调一下，早些时候，一位人类必须手工耕种一块土地。最后我们得到了锄头这个工具，我们可以快速地把它插进地里，使生产变得更快。然后我们得到了犁。然后得到了拖拉机。今天，农业设备让一个农民可以管理超过10,000英亩的农田。如果你去西澳大利亚，就会感到难以置信。这些家伙有24排种植机和收割机，这彻底改变了游戏规则。因此，每个农民的产量单位现在比150年前高出数百万倍。
And in that case, freeberg, nobody wants to do back breaking labor in the fields and everybody wants to do this. But in this case, let me just read you one quote that I didn't read in the original reading of this. He says, I want to make art that isn't the result of scraped internet content from artists that were not asked. And so I think that's part of this is that it's bespoke art.
在这种情况下，Freeberg，没有人愿意在田野里做繁重的劳动，每个人都想做这个。但是在这种情况下，让我读一句我在原始阅读中没有读到的话。他说，我想制作不是从没有被询问的艺术家的刮取的互联网内容的结果的艺术作品。所以我认为这部分是定制的艺术品。
But the one question I have for SACS was SACS. We started this conversation. We're saying, hey, this is different than anything in terms of efficiency that came before it. This is, I'm going to put some words here, but this is like a step function more efficient. So to the argument of, hey, efficiency has always resulted in more ideas and we found something to do with people's time. Is this time different potentially? Because this is so much more powerful.
可是我对SACS有一个问题。我们开始了这个对话。我们说，嘿，这个新的东西的效率比之前的任何东西都要不同。我会用一些词来形容它，但它更像一个更高效的步进函数。所以，对于“效率总是导致更多的想法，而我们找到了人们的时间来做一些事情”的论点，这次时间可能不同吗？因为这太强大了。
This isn't just like a spell checker. I would say differently. I think, and I agree with what Jake Alessing, because I think that the thing that technology has never done is tried to displace human judgment. This allowed us to replace physical exertion of energy, but it has always preserved humans injecting our judgment.
这不仅仅像拼写检查器那样简单。我会不同的表达。我认为，我同意杰克·阿莱辛的看法，因为我认为技术从未试图取代人类的判断力。它让我们可以代替体力劳动，但一直保留了人类注入判断力的这一要素。
And I think this is the first time where we are being challenged with autonomous systems that has some level of judgment. Now we can say, and it's true, again, reform on sin, that that judgment isn't so great. But eventually, and because of the pace of innovation, eventually is probably not that far away, the judgment will become perfect.
我认为这是我们第一次面临有一定判断能力的自主系统的挑战。我们可以说，这种判断力并不是那么强大，这也是事实。但由于技术创新的速度，最终这种判断力会变得完美，而这一天也许并不会太远。
I'll give you a totally different example. How many pilots are there in the world? Will we, at some point in the next 10 years, want folks to actually manually take off and land, or will we want precision guided instrumentation and computers and sensors that can guarantee a pitch perfect landing every single time in all kinds of weather conditions so that now planes can even have 50X the number of sensors with a computer that can then process it and act accordingly.
我来给你们举一个完全不同的例子。全世界有多少个飞行员呢？在未来的十年里，我们会想要真正让人手动起飞和着陆吗？还是我们希望有精准的引导仪器、计算机和传感器，能够在所有气候条件下每一次都保证一个完美的着陆，因此现在的飞机甚至可以使用50倍于以前的传感器，并用计算机进行处理和相应操作。
Just a random example that isn't even thought of when we talk about sort of where AI is going to rear its head. I think that this judgment idea is an important one to figure out, because this is the first time I've seen something that is bumping up against our ability to have judgment. And what this person was talking about in this mid-journey example is his judgment has been usurped.
这只是一个随机示例，当我们谈论人工智能将在何处出现时，甚至没有想过。我认为这个评判想法是重要的，因为这是我第一次看到一些东西与我们的判断能力相冲突。这个人在这个中途示例中谈到的是他的判断被篡夺了。
Yes. I would disagree. I don't know. Let me just make one point on this. So, an image is a matrix of data that's rendered on a screen as pixels and those pixels are different colors. And that's what an image is. Is it the judgment of the creator? Well, no, I'm just saying an image in general.
是的，我不同意。我不知道。让我就这个问题提出一个观点。所以，一个图像是在屏幕上呈现的数据矩阵，这些像素有不同的颜色，这就是一个图像。它是创作者的判断吗？嗯，不是，我只是说一般的图像。
So when Adobe Photoshop and Digital Photography arose, photographers were like, this is BS, why you digitizing photography was analog and beautiful before. And then what digital photography allowed is the photographer to do editing and to do work that was creative beyond what was possible with just a natural photograph taken through a camera. And there are arguably different art forms, but it was a new kind of art form that emerged through digital photography.
所以，当 Adobe Photoshop 和数字摄影出现时，摄影师们都很不满，觉得你们把过去那个美丽的模拟摄影数字化了，这是废话。但数字摄影所带来的是，摄影师可以进行编辑和创作，超出了单纯通过相机拍摄自然照片所能实现的范畴。可能有不同的艺术形式，但数字摄影催生了一种新的艺术形式。
And then in the early 90s, there was a plugin suite called Kai's Power Tools that came out in Adobe Photoshop. And it was a third party plugin set. You would buy it and then it would work on Photoshop and it did things like motion blur, sharpening, pixelation, all these interesting kind of like features. And prior to those tools coming out, the judgment of the digital artist, the digital photographer was to go in and do pixel by pixel changes on the image to make that pixel, to make that image look blurry or to make it look sharper or to make it look like it had some really interesting motion feature.
在90年代初期，有一个插件套件叫作Kai's Power Tools在Adobe Photoshop中推出。这是一个第三方插件套件。你会购买它，然后它会在Photoshop上运作，并且它能做一些有趣的特性，例如动态模糊、锐化、像素化等等。在这些工具出现之前，数字艺术家和数字摄影师的任务是逐像素地改变图像，让它看起来模糊或清晰，或者加入一些有趣的动态特性。
And the Kai's Power Tools created this instant toolkit where in a few seconds, you created a blur on the image. And that was an incredible toolkit, but a lot of digital artists said, this is automating my work. What is my point now? Why am I here? And the same happened in animation when three, when CGI came around and animators were no longer animating cells by hand. And in every point in this evolution, there was a feeling of loss initially, but then the evolution of a whole new art form emerged and an evolution of a whole new area of human creative expression emerged.
Kai的Power Tools创建了这个即时工具箱，只需几秒钟，您就可以在图像上创建模糊。 这是一个令人难以置信的工具箱，但许多数字艺术家说，这是自动化我的工作。 我现在的观点是什么？ 我为什么在这里？ 当三维动画和CGI出现时，动画师不再手工动画胶片。 在这个演变的每个点上，最初都有一种失落感，但是随后整个新艺术形式的演变和整个人类创造性表达领域的演变出现了。
And I think we don't yet know what that's going to look like. But do you think perspective over here? Do you think the level of judgment that AI offers you is the same as the level of judgment that Kai Power Tools offered? Yeah, look, I mean, I think that the person making the judgment or the decision about which pixel to change into what color felt like, you know, I have control. And I think it's ultimately like, I just totally disagree with you. I mean, I think that this is a magnitude different. I'm going to be saying it's more of a than a magnitude difference. Yeah.
我认为我们还不知道那会是什么样子。你认为这边的看法怎么样？你认为人工智能提供给你的判断水平和Kai Power Tools提供的判断水平是相同的吗？嗯，我觉得在判断或者决策哪个像素改成什么颜色这个方面，那个决策者会感觉到自己有掌控。我认为最终孰对孰错，我们的看法是完全不同的。我觉得这是一个相差甚远的等级差距。是的。
It's a lot of tools. It's still love. It's on you. You and I have sat in spreadsheets. By the time. And we've, I'm generally happy with this idea. So I'll give you a different example. Today we use radiologists and pathologists to identify cancers. Yep. There are closed loop systems. We have one right now that's in front of the FDA. That is a total closed loop system that will not need any human input. So I don't know what those folks do. Except what I can tell you is that we can get cancer detection basically down to a 0% error rate that is not possible with human intervention. That is judgment. Right. Right. So I just think it's important to really acknowledge that this is happening at a level that it's never happened before. You may be right that there's some amazing job for that radiologist or pathologist to do in the future. I don't know offhand what that is. But these are closed loop systems now that think for themselves and self-improve.
这是很多工具。但我仍然喜欢它。这在你身上。你和我曾经坐在电子表格里。这么多年过去了，我对这个想法感到非常满意。那么，我就给你一个不同的例子。今天我们使用放射科医师和病理学家来识别癌症。是的，有闭环系统。我们现在有一个正在FDA面前的完全闭环系统，它不需要任何人的干预。所以我不知道这些人在做什么。但我可以告诉你的是，我们可以将癌症检测基本上降到0%的错误率，这是通过人类干预不可能实现的。那是判断。没错。所以我认为真的很重要要承认这是在前所未有的水平上发生的。你可能是对的，未来放射科医师或病理学家会有某些惊人的工作。我不知道那是什么。但现在这些都是自我思考和自我改进的闭环系统。
I get it, but I think that there is an unfathomable set of things that emerge. We did not have the concept of Instagram influencers. We did not have the concept of personal trainers. We did not have the concept of like all these new jobs that have emerged in the past couple of decades that people enjoy doing that they can make money doing that is a greater kind of experience and level of fulfillment for those that choose and have the freedom to do it than what they were having to do before when they had to work just to make money. And there's going to be radiologists or pathologists wants to do. Be a trainer or a Pilates instructor? No, I think we don't know what that's going to look like. All right.
我明白你的意思，但我认为有一些难以琢磨的事情正在涌现。我们没有 Instagram 影响者 的概念。我们没有个人训练师的概念。我们没有所有这些在过去几十年中涌现的新工作的概念，人们喜欢做这些工作，他们可以通过这些工作赚钱，这种经历和满足度远超他们以前为了挣钱而必须做的事情。未来会有想成为放射科医生或病理学家的人吗？还是成为训练师或普拉提教练？我想我们不知道未来会是怎样的。
So having the team, yeah. You have any thoughts on this as we wrap this topic. It's obviously a lot of passion coming out.
那么，既然有了团队，你（们）对这个话题有什么想法呢？显然，大家都很有热情。
Yeah. I look at the elimination of white college jobs in a massive way. I think that this is a short term versus long term thing.
是的，我非常关注大规模消除白人大学工作机会的问题。我认为这是短期和长期的问题。
In the short term, I see the benefits of AI being very positive because I don't think it's in most cases wiping out human jobs is making them way more productive. You still need the developer. It's just that there are five times or 10x more productive. But I don't think we're at the point in the short term where you're going to eliminate that role entirely.
在短期内，我认为AI的好处非常积极，因为我认为大多数情况下它并没有消灭人类的工作，只是使它们的生产力提高了五倍或十倍。你仍然需要开发者。只是他们的生产力提高了很多。但我认为在短期内，我们还没有达到完全淘汰这个角色的地步。
What I've seen in basically every start of an apartment and a part of is that the limiting factor on progress is always engineering bandwidth. That is always the thing that you wish you had more of. It's the product roadmap is always the most competed on thing inside the organization.
我在看到每个公寓和部门一开始的情况时，基本上都发现制约进展的因素始终是工程带宽。这是你总是希望拥有更多的东西。产品路线图始终是组织内最具有竞争力的事情。
It's trying to get their project prioritized because there's never enough engineering bandwidth. It's really the lifeblood of the company.
我们正在努力让他们的项目得到优先考虑，因为工程师永远都不够用。这确实是公司的命脉。
If you make the developer is more productive, it may be just accelerates to product roadmap. I don't think in the short term that what's going to happen is these companies are going to look to cut all their developers because one or two of them can do 10 times the work.
如果你让开发人员更有生产力，可能会加速产品路线图的推进。我认为短期内，这些公司不会因为其中的一个或两个人可以完成10倍的工作量而裁员。
I think that they're going to try and accelerate their product roadmaps. Again, you have this long term concern that maybe you don't need developers at all at some point. But I think that the benefits of developing this technology are so great in the short to midterm that we're going down that path no matter what. We're just going to have to find out what that long term really looks like. Maybe it's the long term.
我想他们会尽力加快产品路线图。再次，你会有一个长期的担忧：也许在某个时候你根本不需要开发者。但我认为短期到中期开发这项技术的好处是如此之大，无论如何我们都会走下这条路。我们只需要找出那个长期真正是什么样子。也许那就是长期吧。
Yeah, I completely will look very different. I mean, once we're in, once we get past the short term, we may have a different long term view. I think in this narrow vertical, I 100% agree with you.
嗯，我完全会看起来很不同。我的意思是，一旦我们进入了，一旦我们克服了短期困难，我们的长期观点可能会不同。在这个狭窄的领域，我完全同意你。
Look, I think that AI is going to eliminate unit testing. It is already done so. It's going to eliminate most forms of coding. The engineers that you have, all of them will now become 10X engineers. With fewer of them or with the same number, you'll be able to do as much or more than you could have before. That's a wonderful thing.
你看，我认为人工智能将会消除单元测试。它已经做到了。它将会消除大多数编码形式。你们拥有的工程师，他们中的每一个现在都会成为10倍工程师。即使他们数量减少了，或者数量不变，你们现在依然能够完成更多以前难以实现的工作。这是一个美妙的事情。
All I'm saying on that specific narrow vertical is you'll see at first rear its head in companies like Accenture and TCS and Cognizant because they have an immediate incentive to use this tooling to drive efficiency and profitability that's rewarded by shareholders. It'll be less visible in other companies. But what I am saying though is that you have to think about the impact on the end markets for a second.
在这个特定而狭窄的垂直方向上，我想表达的就是你将会看到像Accenture、TCS和Cognizant这样的公司首先采用这种工具以推动效率和盈利，因为这将受到股东的回报。在其他公司中，这种现象会不那么明显。但我要说的是，你需要考虑这种工具对最终市场的影响。
I think that AI does something that other technology layers have never done before, which is supplant human judgment in a closed loop manner. I just think it's worth appreciating that there are many systems and many jobs that rely on human judgment where we deal with error bars and an error rate that a computer will just destroy and blow out of the water. We will have to ask ourselves, should this class of job exist with its inherent error rate or should it get replaced fully by a computer which has no error rate? I think that's an important question that's worth putting on the table.
我认为AI做了其他技术层从未做过的事情，那就是以闭环方式代替人类判断。我认为值得赞赏的是，有许多系统和工作都依赖人类判断，其中我们需要应对误差率和误差范围，而计算机只会把它们摧毁并且完全遵循。我们需要问自己，这类工作应该存在于其本质误差率中，还是应该完全由计算机取代而没有误差率？我认为这是一个值得提上议程的重要问题。
Okay. Let's wrap here. Finally, I thought it was like, you're going to see entire jobs, categories of jobs go away. We've seen this before, phone operators, travel agents, copy editors, illustrators, logo designers, accountants, sales development reps. I'm seeing a lot of these job functions in the modern world like phone operators previously. I think these could wholesale just go away and they would just be done by AI and I think it's going to happen in a very short period of time.
好的。我们来总结一下吧。最后，我认为很多工作种类都可能会消失。以前我们也看到过这种情况，比如电话操作员、旅行代理人、编辑、插画师、商标设计师、会计师和销售代表等等。我发现现代社会中很多工作职能跟电话操作员有相似之处。我认为这些工作完全有可能被人工智能所取代，而且这种情况很快就会发生。
It's going to be about who can transition and some people might not be able to make the transition and that's going to be pain in suffering. It's going to be in the white collar lines and those people have more influence. I think this could lead to some societal disturbance. I'm going to learn pilates and be an influencer.
它将涉及到谁能够过渡，有些人可能无法过渡，这会带来痛苦和苦难。这会出现在白领界线上，这些人拥有更多的影响力。我认为这可能会导致一些社会动荡。我将学习普拉提，并成为一个有影响力的人。
That's it. I do agree with SACs that the software development backlog of this is what you're saying is so great that I don't think we'll see it in software development for a decade or two. There's just so much software that still needs to be made.
就是这样。我同意 SACs 的观点，你所说的这个软件开发滞后是如此之大，以至于我认为我们在软件开发方面至少需要十年或二十年才能看到它。还有许多需要开发的软件。
Last week we talked about TikTok and this first bipartisan hearing. We've seen it in a long time and people actually frame incorrectly exactly how dangerous it is in my opinion to have TikTok in the United States.
上个星期我们谈到了TikTok和这次首次的两党听证会。在我看来，人们实际上错误地认为在美国拥有TikTok是多么危险。
Of course, then we get the great disappointment of the actual bill. Their strict act was proposed by Senator Mark Warner, Democrat Virginia on March 7th. The problem with it is as it seems like it's poorly worded that there will be civil penalties and criminal penalties to Americans for breaking the law and using software that's been banned. Many people said this probably is just bad language.
当然，那么我们就会得到实际账单的巨大失望。他们的严格法案由弗吉尼亚州民主党参议员马克·华纳于3月7日提出。问题在于，似乎它措辞不当，如果美国人违反法律并使用被禁止的软件，将面临民事处罚和刑事处罚。许多人说这可能只是糟糕的措辞。
I have a question. Yeah, go ahead.
我有一个问题。嗯，请问。
Does it supply to incognito mode? Because if it does not need a mode, it's not.
它支持隐身模式吗？因为如果它不需要模式，那就不是了。
Yes. There's one way. They're saying that you can get you can get fined or 20 years in jail whatever it is for using a VPN to VPN to TikTok.
是的，有一种方式。他们在说，如果你使用VPN连接到TikTok，可能会被罚款或入狱20年，无论是什么原因。
Freiburg, what are your thoughts on it?
你对弗莱堡有什么想法？
Look, I think this is a real threat to the open internet. I'm really concerned about the language that's been used that basically speaks to protecting the safety and security of the American people by actively monitoring network traffic and making decisions about what network traffic isn't allowed to be transmitted across the open internet.
你看，我认为这是对开放互联网的真正威胁。我真的很担心使用的语言基本上是为了保护美国人民的安全和安全性而积极监控网络流量，并做出关于哪些网络流量不允许在开放互联网上传输的决定。
It's the first time that I think in the United States we are seeing like a real threat and a real set of behaviors from our government that looks and feels a lot like what goes on in China and elsewhere where they operate with a closed internet and internet that's controlled, monitored, observed, tracked and and gates are decided by some set of administrators and what is and isn't appropriate. And the language is always the same. It's for safety and security of the people.
这是我第一次认为，在美国，我们面临着来自政府的真正威胁和一系列行为，看起来很像中国和其他地方那样，他们运营着一个封闭的互联网，这个互联网受到控制、监视、跟踪，门户由一些管理者决定，什么是适当的和不适当的。而语言总是相同的，就是为了保障人民的安全和安全。
The entire purpose of the internet is that it did not have bounds that it did not have governments that it did not have controls that it did not have systems that are politically and economically influenced that the architecture of the internet wasn't always would be open. The protocols are open, the transmission of data on that network would be open. And as a result, all people around the world would have access to information of their choosing and it allowed ultimate freedom of choice.
互联网的全部目的在于它没有边界，没有政府掌控，没有受政治和经济影响的系统，它的架构总是开放的。协议是开放的，网络数据传输也是开放的。因此，世界上所有的人都可以访问自己选择的信息，这使得最终的选择自由成为可能。
You know, this kind of is the first of what I'm concerned creates a precedent that ultimately leads to a very slippery slope saying that TikTok cannot make money in the US by charging advertisers or managing commerce flows is one thing. That's where the government can and should and could if they chose to have a role.
你知道，我现在所关注的问题是，这样的例子首开先例，最终可能导致很滑稽的事情。即，禁止TikTok在美国通过向广告商收费或管理商业流量赚钱，这是一回事。这正是政府可以、也应该、也可以选择有所作为的领域。
But I think going in and observing tracking internet traffic and making decisions about what is and isn't appropriate for people. I think is one of the things that we all should be most concerned about what's going on right now. There is no end in sight to this if you allow this to happen in the first time.
我认为进入并观察互联网流量并作出适合人们的决定，这是我们所有人都应该最关注的事情之一。如果你允许这种情况发生一次，那么这种情况就没有尽头。
You know, VPNs, virtual private networks allow you to anonymously access internet traffic and and access internet traffic via remote destinations. So that the ultimate consumption of content that you're using can't be tracked and monitored by local agencies or ISPs.
你知道，VPN指的是虚拟私人网络，它可以让你通过远程目标匿名地访问互联网流量以及访问互联网流量。这样，你使用的内容的最终消费就不会被当地机构或互联网服务提供商追踪和监控。
And I think that saying that that can now be restricted takes away all ability to have true privacy and all rights to privacy on the open internet. So I'd love to talk about this more unfortunately I got to run.
我认为说现在可以限制这个的说法会剥夺我们在公开互联网上享有真正隐私和隐私权的能力。所以我很想更多地讨论这个问题，不过不幸的是我得走了。
But this is a super threat to me and I think this is something we should be super, super concerned about and that the entire community of technology, internet and anyone that wants to have freedom of choice steps up and says this is totally inappropriate and over-reached. There are other ways to manage stuff like this. I feel like complete over-reached sex.
但这对我来说是一个超级威胁，我认为这是我们应该非常非常关注的事情，整个科技和互联网社区以及任何想要选择自由的人都应该站出来说这是完全不合适和超限的。管理这种东西还有其他的方式。我感觉完全被超限了。
Yeah, I agree with this. Intentional over-reach or poorly written or somewhere in between what do you think?
是的，我同意这个观点。你认为这是故意超范围、写得不好还是介于两者之间？
Both, I think both. I think this is the biggest bait and switch that a Washington, the central government has ever tried to pull on us. Everybody thinks that they're just trying to ban TikTok from operating the US. If that's all they did, then I think the bill would be supported by most Americans. But that's not what they're doing. They're not restricting TikTok. They're restricting us. That's not the goal here, yeah.
我认为两者都是。我认为这是华盛顿，中央政府试图对我们施加的最大的诱饵和转换。每个人都认为他们只是试图禁止TikTok在美国运营。如果只是这样，那么我认为这个法案将被大多数美国人支持。但这不是他们正在做的。他们没有限制TikTok。他们在限制我们。这不是这里的目标，对吧。
What a bait and switch. It's a huge bait and switch.
这也太明目张胆了。简直是一个大大的骗局。
And so just so you know what the act provides is that a US citizen using a VPN to access TikTok could theoretically be subjected to a maximum penalty of one million in fines or 20 years in prison or both. Now they'll say, Mark Warner, the sponsor legislation will swear up and down. That's not the intent. But the problem is that the language of the bill is so vague that some clever prosecutor may want to pursue this theory one day. And that needs to be stopped.
所以，只是为了让您知道，该法案提供的是，一个美国公民使用VPN访问TikTok，理论上可能面临最高一百万美元的罚款或20年的监禁，或两者兼而有之。现在，发起立法的Mark Warner会发誓并坚称这不是意图。但问题在于，该法案语言太模糊，一些聪明的检察官可能有一天想追究这个理论。这需要停止。
Also, there's another problem with the bill, which is you think this is just about TikTok. It's not. What they do is it says here, I guess they don't want to mention TikTok by name. So they're trying to create a category of threatening application. But because it is a category, it's very, very broad. So the bill states that it covers any transaction, transaction, not just an app, in which an entity described in some paragraph B has any interest. And then entity described in some paragraph B are quote, a foreign adversary. An entity subject to the jurisdiction of organizing the laws of a foreign adversary and entity own director control by either of these.
还有一件事情，这个法案还存在另一个问题，就是你认为这只是关于TikTok的问题。但事实并非如此。根据所写的内容，它似乎不想点名TikTok。因此，他们试图创建一个危险应用程序的类别。但由于这是一个类别，它非常非常宽泛。因此，法案规定，它涵盖的任何交易，不仅仅是应用程序，只要实体在B段落中被描述，就无论其性质为何，都包括在内。而在B段落所描述的实体是指“外国对手”，“受外国对手组织法律管辖”的实体和由这些实体拥有或控制的实体。
And then it gives the executive branch the power to name a foreign adversary, any foreign government regime that one of the cabinet secretaries defines without any vote of Congress. So this is giving sweeping powers to the executive branch to declare foreign companies to be enemies. It feels like the plot of the prequels.
然后它赋予行政部门权力，任何内阁秘书定义的外国对手，任何外国政府政体，不需经过国会投票。因此，这赋予行政部门宣布外国公司为敌人的广泛权力。感觉就像前传的情节。
It's all worse. Well, let's see. But how are we going? Well, we criticize China for having a great firewall. What do you think this is?
“一切都变得更糟了。”嗯，让我看看。我们怎么办？嗯，我们批评中国有个巨大的防火墙。你认为这是什么？
Yeah. I mean, this should obviously have nothing to do with the American consumer and everything to do with the foreign adversary collecting data of Americans at scale.
是的，我是说，这显然与美国消费者没有关系，而是与外国对手大规模收集美国人的数据有关。
This could be written in a much simpler way. You know what it should be? It should be one sentence, which is that app stores are prohibited from allowing TikTok to be an app in their store. That's what they do in India. That's it. Case closed game over.
这句话可以更简单地表达。你知道怎么做吗？就是只需要一句话，就是阻止应用商店将TikTok放在他们的商店里。这在印度就是这样做的。就这样，问题解决了，游戏结束了。
I think India is doing okay, right? We block like 100 Chinese apps, and I think their society is still functioning.
我觉得印度还算不错，对吧？我们封锁了大约100个中国应用，但我觉得他们的社会依然正常运作。
So, you know, I'll do respect to AOC, you know, like the idea that 150 million Americans are going to suffer because they can't be tracked by the CCP is kind of nuts.
所以，你知道的，我对AOC要表达尊重，但认为1.5亿美国人因为无法被中共跟踪而受到困扰的想法有些疯狂。
This is going to give sweeping powers to the security state to surveil us, to prosecute us, to limit our air usage. This is basically the biggest power grab in bait and switch they've ever tried to pull on us.
这将给安全状态授予大量权力来监视我们、起诉我们、限制我们使用空气。这基本上是他们试图对我们进行的最大力量抢夺和欺骗。
And again, if they really were concerned about TikTok, it's one sentence. Yeah. We were done.
再说一遍，如果他们真的关心TikTok的话，那只是一个句子而已。是的，我们已经结束了。
All right, everybody. It's been an amazing episode for the Sultan of Science, David Freiburg, the Rainman of Self-Habits Acts, and the dictator, Chimoff Polly, Hapatia. I am the world's greatest moderator, and we'll see you next time. Bye-bye.
好的，大家。对于科学之苏丹David Freiburg、自我习惯行动的雨人以及独裁者Chimoff Polly Hapatia，这是一集精彩绝伦的节目。我是世界上最伟大的主持人，我们下次再见。拜拜。
We're like your winners, right? Let's go.
我们就像你们的优胜者一样，对吧？出发吧。
We should all just get a room and just have one big huge or something because they're all just like this like sexual tension that they just need to release that.
我们都应该找个房间，搞个巨大的派对或者什么的，因为他们都充斥着性张力，需要释放一下。
You're the big, what, you're the European. You're the European.
你是个大人物，对吧，你是欧洲人。你就是欧洲人。
Where did you get my cheese?
你从哪里拿了我的奶酪？
I'm going on leave. I'm going on leave.
我要请假了。